XMPP Council - 2016-07-13

  1. Lance

    I'm not going to be able to be in the meeting today. Agenda item is: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/pars.html

  2. MattJ


  3. Dave Cridland

    Also present.

  4. SamWhited notates

  5. Tobias

    here :P

  6. MattJ

    Anyone else? or should we skip?

  7. MattJ

    Great :)

  8. Zash


  9. Tobias

    of 5 i think

  10. ralphm


  11. Zash


  12. SamWhited

    Who chairs in Lance's absence?

  13. psa


  14. MattJ

    I nominate Dave Cridland

  15. Dave Cridland

    Oh. I suppose so.

  16. Dave Cridland wonders what he's done to MattJ.

  17. Dave Cridland

    Anyone object?

  18. Dave Cridland

    If not:

  19. MattJ

    Dave Cridland, you're a born leader, it was inevitable

  20. Dave Cridland

    1) Roll Call:

  21. Tobias


  22. MattJ


  23. Dave Cridland

    MattJ, Leaders called Dave are going out of fashion.

  24. SamWhited


  25. Tobias

    Donald is en vogue now I've heard

  26. Dave Cridland

    2) I think PARS is the only thing on the agenda. Anyone have a vote?

  27. Tobias

    i'll vote on list

  28. Dave Cridland

    Tobias, We almost have May as PM, it's looking promising we'll have Hammond as Chancellor as well. Many are holding out for Clarkson as Foreign Sec.

  29. psa

    Personally I don't (yet) see the need for PARS

  30. psa

    But that would make me +0 on publication.

  31. Dave Cridland

    I don't think I have any objections either.

  32. Dave Cridland

    MattJ, ?

  33. Tobias

    Dave Cridland, sounds like a fun team to obvserve from the mainland ;)

  34. SamWhited

    Dave: I'd consider moving to the UK if that were the case; Clarkson would make an awesome Foreign Sec; no messing about, if a country annoys him, they'd get punched in the face :)

  35. ralphm

    SamWhited: +1

  36. ralphm

    Also looking forward to him testing out all gov vehicles

  37. MattJ

    +1 to PARS

  38. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, You appreciate that Clarkson's policies would be the same as Trump's?

  39. SamWhited

    (sorry, on topic, Dave does "no objections" mean +1 or +0?)

  40. psa

    sheesh, even in the XMPP Council meeting I can't get away from politics

  41. SamWhited

    Dave Cridland: Yah, except with more common sense and less racism

  42. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, It makes no difference, actually. We don't vote for protoxeps, we only veto (or not).

  43. SamWhited

    ah, okay, I'll just mark you as a +1 then.

  44. MattJ

    SamWhited, you'll regret asking :)

  45. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, But I'm more 0 than +1, i think.

  46. MattJ

    SamWhited, we don't +1 proposals, we just object or don't object, for $reasons

  47. SamWhited

    👍 thanks for the clarification.

  48. MattJ

    All the same in the end

  49. SamWhited

    Cool, I've recorded "no objection" for everyone but Tobias who will review and vote on list.

  50. Tobias

    sound correct

  51. SamWhited

    (wanted to clarify since we got a bit off topic; sorry :) )

  52. Dave Cridland

    OK, AOB?

  53. Dave Cridland

    I do note that there is an outstanding pull request to XEP-0053 (Registrar). It'd benefit the Board, I think, to have views from Council members.

  54. Tobias

    is there any action need from the council

  55. Tobias

    i put in in trello on behalf of Flow

  56. Dave Cridland

    Tobias, Council is not mandated to do anything. But I'll be recommending that Board ask Council's opinion.

  57. SamWhited

    Just having opinions here on the record would be good

  58. ralphm

    What's the status of the Registrar pages?

  59. Dave Cridland

    And yes, if anyone has opinions, then that'd short-cut that process.

  60. ralphm

    (not that this is a question for Council directly)

  61. SamWhited

    (related: Can someone make a "Needs Board" label on Github or give me permission to create labels?)

  62. MattJ

    Link to the PR?

  63. SamWhited


  64. MattJ

    If I had any context on this, I don't remember

  65. MattJ


  66. ralphm

    (is not)

  67. Tobias

    i think it sounds sensible

  68. MattJ

    Ah yes

  69. MattJ

    I agree with this

  70. SamWhited

    Note that this would be work for the already behind editor team (but I'm not against it and also think it's sensible)

  71. Dave Cridland

    OK. Moving on:

  72. ralphm

    I thought somebody was working on having those pages generate again, but it's been a while since I hear about it

  73. Dave Cridland

    4) Next meeting:

  74. Dave Cridland

    Same time same place?

  75. Tobias


  76. psa


  77. Dave Cridland

    5) Ite, Meeting Est.

  78. MattJ


  79. psa

    @ralphm yes we need to get that fixed, I need to head to the airport soon but maybe I can look at it again on Friday when I'm back

  80. Dave Cridland

    Thanks all.

  81. MattJ

    Thanks Dave Cridland

  82. psa

    yep thanks!

  83. Dave Cridland

    And thanks to SamWhited for the minute-taking.

  84. SamWhited

    Date of next confirmed as 2016-07-20 15:00:00 UTC (going to start putting actual times in the minutes because I can never remember what or when sbtsbc is

  85. ralphm

    psa: there was also the question on where the source for it is now with the reshuffling of repos. I seem to remember the registrar section would need to be extracted from the old repo (preserving history)

  86. ralphm

    Kev: right?

  87. Kev

    Sorry, just sat down, how much context do I need to read?

  88. ralphm

    few lines back

  89. ralphm

    I was talking about the status of the registrar pages

  90. Kev

    I created https://github.com/xsf/registrar with all the old context in

  91. Kev

    But I don't remember if I did anything more with it.

  92. ralphm

    so it just needs something to autogen from that?

  93. Kev

    We're still suffering the aftermath of the dismal new site launch.

  94. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, That was impressively quick, thanks.

  95. SamWhited

    Dave Cridland: Thanks; I like to take notes live, otherwise getting context afterwards is tricky, so they're already right there and ready to be sent :)

  96. Tobias

    there's also https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/issues/192

  97. ralphm

    Kev: oh? I thought it was really smooth!

  98. Kev

    ralphm: I think how we update various things is still unclear.

  99. ralphm


  100. Tobias

    right...i'm all for keeping the URLs working...just the question, where to keep the schema info..if we got it in a repo it's trivial to add 2 lines to the cronjob script that updates a directory with changes

  101. SamWhited

    Let's keep the canonical version in the repo Kev made and have the website generate from that. If they're all mixed up it's just going to make updating registry entries (and keeping track of issues) harder for the editors.

  102. Tobias

    does the registrar repo include the schamata?

  103. Tobias

    psa, btw: were the schemata extracted from the XEP XML or were they independent?

  104. ralphm

    I don't think it is in that repo, and it might be better off either independent or as part of the XEP repo

  105. ralphm

    Tobias: good question

  106. SamWhited

    oh, I'm sorry, I misunderstood. I didn't realize XSLs were something different from schemas.

  107. Tobias

    i think the repo Kev created is for the registry, it includes XSL files to translate the XML to XHTML i think

  108. psa

    Tobias: yes, extracted from the XEP once it advanced to Draft or whatever

  109. psa

    XSL, XSD, whatever ;-)

  110. Tobias

    so we have hisotric versions? or why was it not always taked from the XEPs and turned into XML/HTML, ....wonder why the intermediate files were version controlled

  111. Tobias

    if it's all in the XEPs we probably won't need another repo, right?

  112. psa

    these were intended to be machine-readable

  113. SamWhited

    Oh, these are the things in the XEPs? I'm so confused. I should probably learn how XML works outside of the basic profile XMPP uses one of these days…

  114. psa

    i.e., separate files so that a validating XMPP server (not recommended, but there are some!) could ingest those files directly into its process

  115. Tobias

    psa, and the schemata in the XEP XML isn't? were there manual steps involved?

  116. Tobias


  117. psa

    how does someone (a machine) know where the schemas begin and end if they're mixed in with all that prose?

  118. SamWhited

    If this data is all in the XEPs, the XEPs are probably the source of truth, so I think where the extracted data lives is a matter of whos responsibility it is. If it's the editors responsibility to extract these from the XEPs, I'd say separate repo. If it's just a website thing and it's someone on the website teams responsibility, wherever they want (probably in the website repo)

  119. Tobias

    just want to avoid all to much duplicated work for editors or whoever...so thought it'd be possible to just take each of the blocks from http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#schemas and put it in its own XML schema file, right?

  120. Tobias

    i mean that's basically what was done with the old repo, not?

  121. Tobias

    just that the output was then version controlled

  122. psa

    But yeah at this point I don't think we probably need a separate schemas directory / repo - however, setting up redirects from the old URLs to the XEP URLs would be good

  123. Tobias


  124. Tobias

    if someones knows how to rescue the schema folder from our old repo and put it in a github repo that would be great

  125. Tobias

    if that's done i'm happy to do the integration of registrar and schema repos in the new website

  126. Kev

    You mean extract the schema folder such that there's a new repo with all the old history of the folder, but containing only the contents of that one folder?

  127. Tobias


  128. Tobias

    the thing you did for the registry folder

  129. Kev

    Yep, no idea how to do that :)

  130. Kev

    I've not been following the conversation, but is that something that there's agreement I should be doing now?

  131. Tobias

    i don't think we'll ever see more agreement than we have right now

  132. Kev


  133. Kev

    You're Council, so I'll believe you :)

  134. SamWhited dissapeared for a moment, but if we want the history of one directory tree in a git repo you can do it with read-tree; it's fantastic.

  135. SamWhited

    I made this issue for follow up work on proposed XEPs, please correct me if anything there is glaringly wrong or misunderstood: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/issues/209

  136. SamWhited

    I suppose if the registries are generated straight from the XEPs we won't have to actually go through them all, the tooling can just check if they're experimental and add them to the proposed category

  137. Kev

    So, 'schemas' as the name of the new repo?

  138. Kev

    Good - https://github.com/xsf/schemas

  139. Kev

    And the Editors have write access.

  140. SamWhited goes ahead and submits a PR for a pet peeve of his

  141. Kev goes ahead and merges

  142. SamWhited wonders if there's a high five emoji; if not, there should be

  143. Kev

    I don't *think* so.

  144. psa

    ^5 @SamWhited

  145. SamWhited

    Oh wow, I've seen people use that and thought it was some kind of odd twisty winky face :)

  146. MattJ

  147. psa

    SamWhited: yeah, took me awhile to figure out

  148. MattJ

    Could become a new complement in code reviews...

  149. Tobias

    Dave Cridland, seem you've got Johnson instead of Clarkson ;)

  150. SamWhited

    Do we have a general rule for what to do if an author never replies to the "Your XEP was updated, please approve" email?

  151. Tobias

    Do the have to approve?

  152. Tobias

    Do they have to approve?

  153. SamWhited

    Also, I forgot to bring this up at the meeting this morning, but this could use council approval (or disaproval) next week: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/204

  154. SamWhited

    (I think it needs council since 0045 is Draft)

  155. Tobias

    there is also https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/184 luring around for months :)

  156. Kev

    I think the thing to do if an author doesn't respond is to ask Council what to do.

  157. Kev

    There's nothing in our bylaws (of which I'm aware) that requires authors to approve - Council is the body that is responsible for (most) XEPs.

  158. Kev

    Just that we usually have the authors manage these things, because why wouldn't we?

  159. Tobias

    And council rolls a dice?

  160. Kev

    Presumably Council would review the change and decide whether to accept it.

  161. Tobias

    ah ok

  162. Kev

    I imagine usually authors don't reply because either they miss the poke, or they're not interested in working on the XEP any more.

  163. Kev

    If it's that they're active and missed it, poking again is sensible. If they're not interested in working on the XEP any more and it's stable and stuff, just Council reviewing a change makes sense, if it's a XEP that needs continuing authorship, finding a new author probably makes sense.

  164. Tobias

    right..poking definitely makes sense...just wanted to express that we shouldn't block any updates just because the original author is unresponsive

  165. Kev

    /schemas and /registry wasn't it?

  166. Kev

    Not sure.

  167. Tobias

    nearly correct https://web.archive.org/web/20141029032728/http://xmpp.org/resources/registrar/

  168. Dave Cridland

    Tobias, I so hope that's a poor joke.

  169. Dave Cridland

    Oh, crap. It is, but it's Boris.

  170. Tobias

    yup :/