XMPP Council - 2017-08-23

Can't make todays council meeting. Will vote on list. WOuld be great if someone else could run it.

Hi.

I can do it if you want.

So roll call, derdaniel, SamWhited, are you here?

1) Roll call; derdaniel, SamWhited, are you here?

Hi

I'm here

Perfect!

2) Any minute taker?

I can.

Great, so, what’s the trello for today.

3) Compare-and-Publish PubSub Items.

Shall we vote on accepting it?

Wait, where's that?

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

Still marked as needs council on github.

Has it been announced on the list?

Not that I could find from a quick search.

But it’s from April, and ugh…

Then I'll veto until such time as it's been announced on the list, I'm afraid.

Ack, editors, your move!

Dave Cridland, Tobias made the same remark on May 31st.

4) ODR/OMEMO

Both are noted as needs author, so I guess we don’t have anything to act on this week.

5) Carbons

Same it seems.

6) DOAP proposal

#434 is more complicated actually, and mislabelled.

That’s a WIP proposal I sent a few days ago, it may be a bit too early given it’s not spec’d already now that I think about it.

Ge0rG, what should the label be?

It's not really awaiting feedback from the author. It's become confused due to Hints being rejected.

Link Mauve: needs-discussion maybe. The specific PR is blocked due to Hints being -1. The general idea seems not to be liked by everyone.

Link Mauve, Also, I think ODR/OMEMO are both blocked by the CLA needing signing.

(Rather than author feedback)

Ok, so action item: remind andy and remko to sign the CLA.

Anyone wants to do that?

I think #434 is blocked on council/standards people feedback to https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-August/033101.html

But that's something for a long discussion, so not suited for council meeting, and thus feel free to postpone.

Ge0rG, is that part of the next item, about reminding to vote on bumping 0334 to 0.2?

Ok.

Link Mauve, No, Carbons I think.

Ok, I’ll note to read that email/discussion about 0280/0334 and continue on the list.

7) Vote reminders.

Link Mauve: 334 was LastCalled and then -1ed. Looks like it needs to be reworked before

Right, SamWhited vetoed 0.2.

Right. So not a lot of point in anyone voting until we've clarified where to go from there (if anywhere).

Reminder for Tobias and Dave Cridland to vote on obsoleting XEP-0146.

Oh, I thought I had in that meeting.

And reminder for Tobias and I to vote on https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/481

Dave Cridland, IIRC you said you would vote on list, but it doesn’t matter much; you can vote now if you want. :)

Oh. +1 to deprecation, then.

Perfect!

8) AOB?

I'd llike to kindly ask the council to vote on https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/499

Ge0rG, thanks for the AOB, I’m wholefully +1 on that!

Ge0rG, Having implemented this in every server I've got my hands on, then an overwhelming +1.

+1

+1

My client is always sending <presence unavailable/><presence join/> as a workaround.

Mine too

I have issues in mcabber that I think would be fixed by this

(unless Prosody is already doing it, in which case it's the cause of issues in Mcabber)

I'm pretty sure there are issues in most clients that would be fixed by this.

SamWhited: prosody-trunk only AFAIK

I'm on trunk

I added a card there: https://trello.com/c/Q7An3b0T/188-vote-on-xep-0045-clarify-wording-for-a-client-re-syncing-to-a-muc

In that case, I'm still +1, but I think this causes issues in some clients.

SamWhited, oh?

I'd like to hear some words of wisdom regarding the general direction for carbons, hints and similar. But again, that's tough to put into the current format.

SamWhited, jabber.org has done this for, well, ages. As far as I know, the only case it caused some issues was due to a bug in GTalk.

Ge0rG, I think most everyone is pretty confused there.

Dave Cridland, indeed.

Link Mauve: looks like it. How can I help reduce the overall confusion?

Link Mauve: I'm not 100% sure it's related; we can talk about it later

I'm still +1 either way

Ge0rG, I don’t have any idea right now, the transient vs. non-transient suggestion was nice, but not sure how much it will be accepted as a hints v2.

Maybe a good idea would be to sell that to the people who vetoed hints v1?

Anyway, please do so on the list.

8 bis) AOB?

None from me.

9) Time of next.

+1W?

WFM

*Bangs gravel*, thanks all!

Ite, Meeting Est.

is there a reason why council meetings aren’t held in xsf@?

historical reasons?

or is the question really why board meetings aren't in board@ ?

there is a board@?

no, I’d prefer to have less MUCs and more centralized discussions

but that’s just my opinion

anyways, is this the OMEMO/ODR thing which is referenced in the recent minutes? <https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/482>

if so, I can confirm, yes, this blocks on the CLA

jonasw, Board was moved from board@ a few years back, in order to make it less opaque. Council didn't have the same problem (meetings were always open, and people attended).

hmm, I see

Doesn't mean it's still the right decision. But the problem with Council meetings used to be getting things done without interruptions. :-)

Separation of concern is often a good thing.

I see both sides, I was just wondering and somehow assumed that council@ would be moderated or something