XMPP Council - 2017-05-31

Seems it's about time

1) Roll call

hi

Hiya

Link Mauve, SamWhited ?

Sorry, I'm here

2) Minute taker

I can

great

so shall we vote on a ProtoXEP even if it hasn't been announced by mail?

I'd rather not.

ok

Curious about which it is, mind.

Dave Cridland, https://trello.com/c/wi8fgSfa/180-compare-and-publish-pubsub-items-protoxep

I am attempting to convince the new tooling to build the inbox right now… it's not working. Will advise.

Haven't read it anyway...

Right. The feedback that it (hopefully) gets from standards@ feeds my decision, so I'd rather have it announced on the list etc.

SamWhited, I can look at that.

I don't think my docker stuff makes any effort to build the inbox, IIRC. Should be straightforward to fix (but not while I'm mostly in bed with a cold).

3) ODR / OMEMO : Now that the editors can publish again, do we accept ODR? Do we want to wait on OMEMO discussion to come to some sort of conclusion? - https://trello.com/c/pxYjqmnR/182-odr-omemo

I think SamWhited put it on the agenda

Tobias: that Odr pr isn't finished anyway

Fwiw

So i guess we wait a week to see how the discussions proceed?

I see no reason to rush this

agreed

Is it a thing the Council can even vote on?

Dave Cridland, accepting changes on XEPs? IIRC changes to experimental XEPs don't require council vote

only when it moves to draft

We have to competing changes to an experimental XEP though; I assume council should resolve that dispute if the community can't come to a decision

Tobias, Right... I'm hoping the author just tries to seek rough consensus amongst the group.

I think Council's options are mostly to change the Authors if they feel the current Authors aren't sufficiently gathering community consensus, rather than rejecting changes.

(Or to kill the XEP entirely, naturally)

Kev, Yes, indeed.

alright

So we wait.

4) Proposed changes to XEP-0280 https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/434

XEP-0280 is in Proposed state already for a couple months, which seems a bit weird

Tobias, '280 got stalled. It's not clear that this PR is considered ready by Ge0rG, to me.

it's been put on the agenda though

By whom?

SamWhited

while those rules look mostly correct to me and i also trust that georg put a lot of thought into those it somehow feels wrong to have such a complex set of rules

i feel like those should be a lot simpler

SamWhited, Did Ge0rG ask for it to be merged?

I have no idea, it's been ages

I just put all PRs on the agenda

all PRs that are "Needs Council" anyways, which I thought this one was

or will need council eventually

daniel, Personally, I agree, but I'm not going to block it on that basis.

Dave Cridland, no me neither

I'd like to punt this one back to the list and see if there's rough consensus. There's a lot of independent implementations of Carbons, and I'd like to make sure that fi we are breaking compat, we're doing so only once.

As the person who came up with the last set of rules that got merged, is it sensible for me to review this?

Or, well, the person who got the rough consensus into the XEP, anyway.

Dave Cridland, sounds sensible, I'll ask the author to do so in the PR.

Kev, I'd like to see discussion on the list kicked off, so you're offering to review and send results to the list that sounds great to me.

done

I'll write a note to myself. Not doing work things today, ill :)

5) SHA-1 migration plan

Kev, I can tell by the way you're actively involved in a Council meeting.

I got out of bed 'specially.

Tobias, I volunteer to write a message to the list outlining a metaplan.

Dave Cridland, ta.

I thought maybe the kids would need some adult supervision :D

Tobias, Loosely, I'm going to ask standards@ for known uses of SHA-1, and collate the results.

Would be nice to have a wiki back, to collectively collect results and think of a way forward. But a mailing list archive seems to be as good as a wiki ^^

6) Date of next

same day of week, same time of day, next week

I'm unavailable next week (I think, anyway).

WFM

WFM

wfm

Dave Cridland, want us to reschedule or will you be happy reading the minutes?

Tobias, Go ahead without me.

Tobias, It'll be quicker, for one thing.

good

7) AOB

not sure if this is the right place to vent. but it is a bit frustrating not to get responses on the publish-options questions

daniel, Didn't I reply to those? I thought I had.

daniel, the Re: [Standards] XEP-0223: Clarification thread?

Perhaps you could post a summary thread of where we are so far, to restart discussion?

I don't seem to have that, or is this something older? What's the title?

It looked to me mostly like a discussion had been had (although I admit I don't closely follow all threads now I'm not on Council).

Dave Cridland, you did. but you didn't provide any answers did you?

Tobias, yes

nevermind, found it; gmail search is terrible.

SamWhited: [Standards] XEP-0223: Clarification, last post 25th May

Oh, sorry - I meant to, and I thought I had - I'll go over it again.

ok. thanks

Will read it and reply if I have something to add...atleast marked it unread now :)

any further AOB?

No

Is it worth...(typing)

someone on Council weighing in to the OMEMO discussion and trying to summarise what they think the current state is, so everyone involved can see if they share the same view?

Sounds sensbile..any volunteers?

I know a couple of Council have already made comments in the thread, which is great, but in this particular instance I think further stepping in might be warranted.

Well, if no one volunteers I could try to summarize it on friday or so

Remko: As the one of the main contributors to the discussions, does that sound useful?

Of course.

I would, but I don't think I have a good grasp of what a few people in the threads viewpoints or arguments for or against are

the more people understand the discussion, the better.

So it might be better of someone who hasn't been as involved with it put together the summary

Ok..I'll do it then

any other AOB?

Not from here, thanks.

Seems not

thanks everybody

SamWhited: Did you sacrifice the correct species of goat?

Zash: Ah! Maybe that's the problem, I sacrificed an asian wild goat, but I should have used a domestic one!

SamWhited: If you're trying to fix up the docker template, easiest is to simply symlink into place. I'm happy to look at this tomorrow if you mail me.

Kev: I was trying to do it in the makefile so it could be built locally too

I suppose I could symlink them and then gitignore the links (or just commit them), but it doesn't feel nice…

And it will break on filesystems that don't support symlinks, although, frankly, I don't actually care. It just seems worth mentioning.

oooh, xsltproc is working, its xmllint that's erroring

Maybe path is just broken there

Ahh, the order of the options matters for some reason in xmllint.

Okay, hopefully this will fix things.

Pushing a new dockerfile / makefile

Ah damn, the inbox isn't clean, lots of failing things, gotta format some XEPs first :(

okay, I give up on the inbox; there's just too much broken stuff. Doing it as part of the build and not validating anything might be a work around, but it feels poor.