XMPP Council - 2016-01-06

  1. Kev

    Right, that's MUC2 (MIX) finally submitted.

  2. Dave Cridland


  3. fippo


  4. Flow

    was about time :)

  5. Kev

    I took the slightly unusual approach of annotating in the ProtoXEP those points that I thought most needed list discussion. Partly in order to provoke that discussion, but mostly as a warning to early implementors so they think about both cases and don't write code that makes switching later hard.

  6. Dave Cridland

    That's useful, I think. The TODO in the XML comments possibly less so.

  7. SamWhited

    Woot! Catching up on this mornings conversations… Kev++

  8. Dave Cridland does his school run duty prior to Council.

  9. Kev

    Lance: I seem to be here, so as long as someone says my name to summon me, I'm happy to spare 30mins to be a poor imitation of SamWhited if that's useful.

  10. SamWhited steals covert glances at his computer while in another meeting.

  11. Lance summons Kev

  12. Lance

    it is time

  13. Lance

    0) Roll call

  14. Kev

    I assume that's "Yep, please scribe" :)

  15. Lance

    yep :)

  16. psa


  17. Dave Cridland


  18. Lance

    MattJ Tobias ?

  19. Tobi


  20. Lance

    ah, different nick

  21. Tobi

    yeah...too lazy to move to the other machine or start another swift instance

  22. Lance

    1) Update XEP-0080 <https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/128>

  23. Tobi


  24. psa


  25. Lance

    I'm +1

  26. Tobi

    finally a change that you cna read during the meeting :)

  27. psa


  28. Dave Cridland

    While this looks OK, does this imply that consumers of this format need to handle unexpected elements?

  29. Tobi

    Dave Cridland, isn't that always the case?

  30. Tobi

    you are supposed to ignore tags you don't understand

  31. Dave Cridland

    I hadn't thought about this until just now; happy to raise this on the list, mind.

  32. MattJ


  33. Dave Cridland

    Tobi, Not always; ISTR a lengthy discussion about cases where there was a single element expected, and multiple elements were forbidden.

  34. Lance

    We've added elements before, such as the timezone info

  35. Dave Cridland

    Lance, Since Draft?

  36. Lance


  37. Dave Cridland

    Lance, As I say, not against the change, I just noticed now there's no warning to clients that new elements may be added.

  38. Dave Cridland

    So I'll vote +1, but with food for thought for the future.

  39. Lance nods

  40. Lance

    2) ProtoXEP Mediated Information eXchange (MIX): Accept as Experimental? < http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/mix.html >

  41. Dave Cridland


  42. Lance


  43. Tobi

    haven't read it yet..will do so tomorrow and vote on list

  44. SamWhited


  45. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, I'd +2 if I could.

  46. Lance

    psa MattJ?

  47. Kev tries to decide whether to record Sam's +1 in the minutes :)

  48. psa

    +1 - let the discussion begin!

  49. Kev

    (Matt didn't vote on item 1 either, that I recorded)

  50. MattJ

    +1 to altaccuracy

  51. MattJ

    +1 to MIX

  52. Lance

    3) Summit technical agenda

  53. psa

    well, that is, let the long overdue public discussion begin ;-)

  54. Lance

    This was requested by Dave

  55. psa

    good idea to establish a bit of an agenda ahead of time

  56. Dave Cridland

    Yes, I'd at least like to have a few topics we'd like to get covered.

  57. Lance

    I'll take a chance here, and say MIX :)

  58. Dave Cridland

    I think MIX is one thing that warrants discussion. Possibly e2e, given the momentum in this area might yield some fruitful discussion.

  59. Tobi

    E2E also feels sensible with OMEMO and Flow's recent post

  60. Kev

    I think Flow (if he's attending) might like to say something about the E2E discussions at the GSoC summit.

  61. Kev

    I say "might like", but I mean "should be encouraged to" :)

  62. Dave Cridland

    I don't know if Flow is attending; I think he isn't. But we can figure something out.

  63. Tobi

    but OMEMO folks are i think

  64. Tobi

    = daniel

  65. Kev

    I'd suggest whatever happens that we don't put too many topics on the table that we can't go off-piste (behave) if something interesting comes up. But otherwise, setting some goals for the summit sounds like a good idea to me (having thought about it overnight).

  66. Dave Cridland

    Also, Kev suggested encouraging someone to take proper minutes, even at the cost of spnsoring someone's attendance. I'd like to know if the Council supports this before raising it at the Board meeting.

  67. Tobi

    i like the idea..more communication is good

  68. Lance

    I think having MIX and E2E as target topics is reasonable to me.

  69. psa

    Proper minutes would be very desirable - it seems that we could crowdsource that via etherpad

  70. Lance

    +1 to sponsoring a minute taker

  71. Kev

    psa: I think that generally unless one or two specific people who are good/motivated at that have attended, it's not been done.

  72. psa

    we actually had decent minutes for the last summit until I dropped off

  73. psa nods to Kev

  74. Dave Cridland

    But it sounds like E2E and MIX are the big ones. I don't think we have sufficient IoT people, otherwise I'd suggest that.

  75. psa


  76. SamWhited

    RE minutes: If you want, enso.me (similar to Talky, which we used last time) has a shared notepad built in which works pretty well. No idea how it compares to etherpad, but it's in the same window as the people dialing in, which is nice.

  77. psa

    and I think the Jingle stuff is mostly done - those are smaller fixes anyway and probably don't require broader discussion

  78. psa

    SamWhited: same for Jitsi Meet, no? ;-)

  79. SamWhited

    psa: I don't think Meet has notes? Maybe they've updated that since I last used it though

  80. SamWhited

    Since they're effectively just different frontends on the same platform

  81. SamWhited

    mett.jit.si doesn't make you sign in, which is nice; wish it did have notes.

  82. SamWhited

    Oh hey, nope, psa is right. Ignore me, it totally has notes.

  83. Lance

    Ok, I think we have a good target agenda then

  84. Lance

    4) Date of next

  85. Lance


  86. Kev

    I don't think I have a suitable summary to minute for the minutes discussion.

  87. MattJ


  88. Tobi


  89. Lance

    Kev: Council recommends discussing MIX and E2E at the summit

  90. MattJ

    Kev, "various options for taking minutes were discussed" - I don't think there was a conclusion reached about which we'll take :)

  91. psa

    SamWhited: click "shared document" in the top bar and that brings up etherpad in Jitsi Meet ;-)

  92. Kev

    Lance: I've captured that. It was the second point about minutes that I don't think had any conclusions

  93. MattJ

    That will probably be made on the day, as usual

  94. Dave Cridland

    Lance, Does the Council want minutes? Does the Council want the Board to Do Something about it?

  95. Tobi

    i'd say yes to both

  96. Kev

    Can I suggest treating this as a pseudovote and getting a +1/-1 from everyone?

  97. Lance


  98. Lance


  99. psa


  100. Kev

    I suggest treating this as ...

  101. Tobi


  102. Kev

    Thanks folks, your minutetaker is once again satisfied. :)

  103. Dave Cridland


  104. Tobi


  105. Lance

    Thanks Kev

  106. Lance

    psa, Dave: sbtsbc?

  107. Dave Cridland

    Yes, that's fine.

  108. psa


  109. Lance

    5) AOB

  110. Tobi

    none here

  111. psa

    I have a question

  112. psa

    about how we'd like to handle the Jingle updates

  113. psa

    which are somewhat coordinated across 4 XEPs

  114. psa

    would the Council prefer to consider those all together at the same time?

  115. psa

    or trickle out the spec updates?

  116. Dave Cridland


  117. Lance

    How coordinated do they need to be?

  118. Dave Cridland

    I'd like to trickle out the spec updates, but then trigger the formal approval and update simultaneously.

  119. Kev

    Jingle-XEP-Trickle. I see what you did there.

  120. Dave Cridland

    Kev, (n)Ice joke there.

  121. Kev

    Also good.

  122. psa

    Dave Cridland: sure, that works for me

  123. psa

    I'll start pushing toward that goal

  124. psa

    having the Jingle ICE XEP published will help

  125. psa

    that's enough for me to proceed, thanks

  126. psa


  127. Lance

    thanks Peter

  128. Lance

    Any other AOB?

  129. Dave Cridland

    I'd just like to thank Kev for both the minutes and MIX.

  130. psa

    indeed, thanks Kev!

  131. Kev

    Welcome, and Peter did most of the MIX wording.

  132. Lance

    Thanks Kev

  133. Dave Cridland

    It's the submission that makes me particularly happy, though.

  134. Lance

    Looks like no other AOB

  135. Lance bangs gavel

  136. Lance

    thanks all

  137. Kev

    Yes. Although now I'll have to try to find someone to implement it in our codebases :)

  138. Kev

    Thanks all :)

  139. psa

    SamWhited: I'm still thinking about your i18n question ;-)

  140. Kev

    I want special recognition for managing to write 2016 not once, but twice in the minutes without writing 2015 first.

  141. Lance

    ^5 Kev

  142. Kev

    Thank you, thank you.

  143. Tobi

    is there an award for that?

  144. SamWhited

    psa: Yah, no worries; I actually avoided it all together by just not having a preparation step and always doing enforcement (at least with existing profiles, the benchmarks I wrote were plenty fast)

  145. Kev

    I'm hoping the award is Tobi +1ing MIX :)

  146. psa


  147. psa

    SamWhited: interesting!

  148. Dave Cridland

    Lance, I think you mean ^6.

  149. Kev

    Two observations after taking minutes (neither of which need any actions, they're just observations). 1) Writing the minutes as you went along was easier that waiting until afterwards (possibly I should have always done this instead of doing it post-meeting). 2) I think it helps to be thinking of the minutes to ensure stuff that means actions gets definite conclusions (which was my argument for not having non-chair minute takers, but in this case as long as people don't mind the minute taker moaning until there's a resolution that seems to not matter).

  150. psa

    Kev: good points, both

  151. Dave Cridland

    Indeed. In real meetings, when I'm taking minutes, I've tended to halt discussion in order to read out my suggested summary if I can't figure it out, or it it's unclear.

  152. Lance

    Kev: good feedback, thanks

  153. Lance

    For the record then: anytime a minute taker wants to request a +/-1 vote to clarify things or get a summary, I'll allow it :)

  154. Lance

    SamWhited ^

  155. SamWhited