XMPP Council - 2016-07-13

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

Here

Also present.

here :P

Anyone else? or should we skip?

Great :)

3/?

of 5 i think

hi

psa?

Who chairs in Lance's absence?

here

I nominate Dave Cridland

Oh. I suppose so.

Anyone object?

If not:

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

1) Roll Call:

here

here

MattJ, Leaders called Dave are going out of fashion.

*snort*

Donald is en vogue now I've heard

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

i'll vote on list

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.

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

But that would make me +0 on publication.

I don't think I have any objections either.

MattJ, ?

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

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 :)

SamWhited: +1

Also looking forward to him testing out all gov vehicles

+1 to PARS

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

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

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

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

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

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

SamWhited, you'll regret asking :)

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

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

👍 thanks for the clarification.

All the same in the end

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

sound correct

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

OK, AOB?

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.

is there any action need from the council

i put in in trello on behalf of Flow

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

Just having opinions here on the record would be good

What's the status of the Registrar pages?

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

(not that this is a question for Council directly)

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

Link to the PR?

https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/192

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

Thanks

(is not)

i think it sounds sensible

Ah yes

I agree with this

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

OK. Moving on:

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

4) Next meeting:

Same time same place?

wfm

WFM

5) Ite, Meeting Est.

+1

@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

Thanks all.

Thanks Dave Cridland

yep thanks!

And thanks to SamWhited for the minute-taking.

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

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)

Kev: right?

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

few lines back

I was talking about the status of the registrar pages

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

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

so it just needs something to autogen from that?

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

SamWhited, That was impressively quick, thanks.

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 :)

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

Kev: oh? I thought it was really smooth!

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

marvelous

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

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.

does the registrar repo include the schamata?

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

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

Tobias: good question

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

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

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

XSL, XSD, whatever ;-)

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

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

these were intended to be machine-readable

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…

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

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

right

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

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)

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?

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

just that the output was then version controlled

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

ok

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

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

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?

right

the thing you did for the registry folder

Yep, no idea how to do that :)

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

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

OK.

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

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

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

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

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

And the Editors have write access.

I don't *think* so.

^5 @SamWhited

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

⁵

SamWhited: yeah, took me awhile to figure out

Could become a new complement in code reviews...

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

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

Do they have to approve? ✏

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

(I think it needs council since 0045 is Draft)

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

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

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.

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

And council rolls a dice?

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

ah ok

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.

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.

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

/schemas and /registry wasn't it?

Not sure.

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

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

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

yup :/