By my reckoning (the editor team haven't responded to me asking if we're supposed to be voting on BOSH), our agenda today is roughly Roll/Date/AOB.
Tobiashas left
Zashhas joined
m&mhas joined
stpeterhas joined
stpeter
love those short meetings :-)
stpeter
bbiaf
Dave Cridlandhas joined
fippo
https://gist.github.com/jamesvnz/6756208 -- this makes me wonder if they seriously abuse the type attribute...
m&m
oi!
MattJhas left
MattJhas joined
fippo
ah... they don't -- https://developer.android.com/google/gcm/ccs.html
Lancehas joined
Kev
Hola.
Tobias
hi
Kev
1) Are we rolls?
Kev
I'm here.
Tobias
here
MattJ
Here
Lance
here
Kev
And fippo's obviously not here, as he was talking a moment ago.
Kev
fippooooooooooooooo
fippo
errr... yes
Kev
Assuming I'm right about not having more stuff.
Kev
2) Date of next.
Kev
I can't do next Wednesday
MattJ
Hmm, not sure yet if I can
Kev
Can skip a week, move it, or have it without me.
Kev
I'd be inclined to skip a week, given IETF.
Tobias
wfm
Tobias
the skipping
fippo
skip it
Zash
the skippening
Lance
wfm to skip
Kev
Excellent.
Dave Cridlandskips about. Tra-la-la.
Kev
3) AOB?
MattJ
None here
m&m
I have one item to bring up
m&m
if I may
Kev
I note, not as directly business, that the Editors are now functional.
Dave Cridland
Can I ask the COuncil members in particular to look at my XEP-0001 change proposal?
Kev
m&m: Shoot.
Kev
Dave Cridland: Oh, about that, I note that Council /do/ vote on Humerous generally.
Kev
They just do it by pre-approving whatever the author is going to say.
Kev
Which is obviously a nonsense. But I don't see a reason to change it.
m&m
historically, we had a page that collected all of the protocols, and provided short information block on them
m&m
http://xmpp.org/protocols
m&m
however, that page (and its children) haven't been updated in several months — possibly years
stpeter
probably years
m&m
so my question is, does the council see value in keeping it?
Kev
A list of registered namespaces seems worthwhile. Pointing to the XEPs in which they're registered seems worthwhile. More than that seems not, to me.
MattJ
Is this from when we had pages at jabber.org/protocol/*?
Dave Cridland
Oh... So this probably made more sense when we used the http://jabber.org/protocol namespace.
Kev
MattJ: Yes.
m&m
yes
MattJ
To be honest it would be nice if we could preserve those links, but not necessary
Dave Cridland
Speaking from the floor, while the XMPP Registrar certainly needs to maintain a list of allocated namespaces, I see no particular reason for anyone else to dictate its form.
m&m
we already have the registrar list
stpeter
as I recall, the http://jabber.org/protocol/* namespaces all had pages like this and then we had redirects in place to point those to these pages at xmpp.org
m&m
this is, in some sense, duplicate information
stpeter
m&m: yes
Zashhas left
Zashhas joined
Kev
m&m: I think this was a straw poll rather than a Council action, right?
Kev
m&m: And that we've now done that?
m&m
it is, yes
m&m
well, I'm inclined to remove the landing page, and leave the existing directories in place
m&m
at least for http://jabber.org/protocol/* links
m&m
but not do any other updates
Kev
This seems sensible to me.
Kev
m&m: Happy that we're done?
stpeternods
MattJ
+1
m&m
grazie
Dave Cridland
Kev, As for Humorous XEPs, I didn't *think* Coucil approved them in any meaningful sense. I couldn't remember voting on any, certainly. I'm happy with whatever; as usual I'm more interested in documenting what is done here.
Kev
AOAOB?
Tobias
+1
Tobias
none here
Kev
Dave Cridland: I remember voting on them, but only in a loose sense. I'm vaguely opposed to introducing a new approving body.
stpeter
Dave Cridland: the Editor would send them to the Council members (off-list, to retain some element of surprise)
Kev
I think this is outside Council discussion, so let's carry on after.
Dave Cridland
Kev, OK. Please post that to the list; it'll spark some debate.
stpeter
nod
Kev
I think we're done with Council.
Kev
Thanks all
Kevbangs the gavel.
Tobias
thank you
m&m
thanks!
Kev
Dave Cridland: Yes, I'll look at them more thoroughly (like, at all), and post to the list.
MattJ
Thanks
Tobias
Lance, you've suggested adding tags/keyworks to XEPs, right?
MattJdisappears back to 'IRL'
Lance
i have no memory of it, but it would be nice to group them, yes
Tobias
yeah..seems sensible, so what kind of groups did you have in mind?
Tobias
just to get a rough idea
Lance
pubsub, jingle, muc to start
fippo
c2s, s2s, im, presence, pubsub, muc, jingle would be the ones that come to my mind
Tobias
ah..yeah..those seem to make sense
ralphmhas joined
Lance
i'd like a very subjective 'this is a minimum you need to use to be a modern xmpp client', but that might be too subjective unless we do a compliance suite for it first
Lance
just something to avoid listing ~400 xeps at once when someone first lands on the page
Tobias
right
Zash
Wouldn't that be the compliance suites?
Tobias
it sure would ease getting an overview...i'll see what i can do to integrate that in our publishing system
Lance
Zash presumably, yes. it would be nice to make the xep list filterable by those suites
stpeter
oh that's right we need to update the compliance suite(s) document
Lancehas left
Lancehas joined
m&m
fippo: editors of draft-ietf-xmpp-dna want your feedback posted to xmpp@ietf.org!
Tobias
they want you, NOW! ... maybe they'll even hang posters on the walls
m&m
ooo … that's a thought
fippo
m&m: actually that reminds me that I promised peter to re-review https://github.com/linuxwolf/xmpp-fed/pull/1