Tobias: Do you have access to the editors trello (I think you should?) can we move cards directly there and remove the for editors column on ours?
Tobias
perhaps...i don't know about the magical trello powers
Tobias
4) Compliance suites / MAM LC ends today ( SamWhited added this one )
Tobias
SamWhited, is this just a reminder or specific discussion?
SamWhited
I don't know, I assume if the LC is over we should vote?
Tobias
is it over already or does it end today?
SamWhited
It ends today
Link Mauve
It ends today.
Tobias
then it's probably something for next week, right?
SamWhited
I don't think it really matters; seems worth getting it out of the way
SamWhited
Unless you expect lots more discussion to suddenly happen in the next few hours
jerehas joined
Kev
I don't think it much matters, does it? I think there's agreement it needs changes before advancement.
Tobias
alright...one sec
Kev
So it's going to go through another LC and it's not like anyone's feedback's going to be ignored. If you were about to approve it before the LC was over that might be a bit different.
SamWhited
Define "it"?
SamWhited
I think the compliance suites at least are ready for a vote
Kev
Sorry, 313
SamWhited
*nods*
SamWhited
Kev: can you commit to doing the work 313 needs in the next LC period?
Tobias
SamWhited, XEP-0387 is on its way to draft, right?
dwd
I'm sitting here nodding, but that isn't useful - XEP-0313 needs a new version, so it seems daft to sit on it for another week just for the sake of a couple of hours.
Kev
Depends when the next LC period is, presumably.
SamWhited
Tobias: correct
SamWhited
Kev: What sort of a LC period would you like? I think we can be flexible :)
Kev
I don't think we need an LC period until the changes are in.
Link Mauve
dwd, I agree, we should put it back to experimental until Kev or someone else makes the requested changes.
Kev
^
SamWhited
oh I see, I don't really care about the process, whichever
Link Mauve
The next LC will be called when these will be published.
dwd
Link Mauve, And *then* last call it again. :-)
SamWhited
I was just trying to convince Kev to commit to something out loud :)
dwd
Right.
Link Mauve
:D
Tobias
alright...then let's vote
Tobias
5) Vote on moving XEP-0387 (XMPP Compliance Suites 2017) to Draft
Tobias
I'll vote on list
SamWhited
+1
daniel
+1
Link Mauve
+1
SamWhited
(they're "2018" now, FWIW)
dwd
Where are we with 114? I'm a bit lost on the outcome of that.
Tobias
I just compied the email subject
SamWhited
Oh sorry, I meant to send a mail about that. I'm pretty torn, but I decided to leave it as is and let the council vote.
SamWhited
We can address that in the 2019 ones (which I will start as soon as these go to draft)
Link Mauve
dwd, it’s still included.
SamWhited
It doesn't seem important enough to block them to me, but of course YMMV
Link Mauve
Still in core, as per the discussion on list.
dwd
OK.
dwd
+1 to advance to Draft.
Tobias
great
Tobias
6) Vote on moving XEP-0313 (Message Archive Management) to Draft
I'm torn because I still think it's stupid to have MAM and Message Archiving at the same time, but it hardly matters at this point.
SamWhited
+0 I suppose
Kev
I'm of the opinion that 136 should be deprecated regardless, but that matters not.
Link Mauve
SamWhited, I’m going to take that to AOB.
SamWhited
*nods*
SamWhited
I do think MAM still needs some upgrades too, but we've been saying that for a long time so part of me feels like it's time to call it "good enough" and be done with it (unless of course Kev will do the updates :) )
Kev
The main issue as I see it is removing the config into a new XEP.
dwd
I'd be happy to deprecate '136 at this stage. MAM is clearly "almost Draft" at this stage, I'm fully expecting it to fly through LC next time.
jonasw
IIRC MattJ mentioned something about wanting to split it?
Kev
If I was to do that, would those -1s go away?
Kev
I've forgotten what I said in the thread :)
Link Mauve
Kev, archiving rules were also part of the complaints I’ve seen a lot.
Zash
I'm going to cry if you bump the namespace again
Kev
Zash: No reason to, I think.
Link Mauve
dwd, same.
Kev
Link Mauve: I think we should do what we did with Carbons, there. Allow wiggle-room, so we can standardise later when the Big Picture is sorted.
Flow
Also the empty MAM-query result is underspecified
Link Mauve
Kev, exactly.
Link Mauve
With these two changes, you would get my +1 next time.
Kev
(And possibly note that using the same rules for carbons and mam probably makes sense)
Zash
Kev: FWIW I'm forgetting the reason why the last ns bump was justified
Kev
Zash: It might not have been, it's always possible I've been stupid.
dwd
Zash, Because. I moaned at the time it wasn't needed.
dwd
Zash, Unless that was the last one.
Tobias
7) Date of next
Link Mauve
As I see it now, that last namespace bump could have been avoided, sadly.
Kev
We live and learn.
Link Mauve
Tobias, there were two other cards there.
Link Mauve
Namely my proposal to deprecate 0084, and fixing 0048.✎
Tobias
there are tons of cards...but apparently there's AOB and at one time we said we didn't want to have meetings longer than 30 minutes
Link Mauve
Namely my proposals to deprecate 0084, and fixing 0048. ✏
Link Mauve
Oh, go ahead then. :)
Link Mauve
+1W works for me.
SamWhited
WFM too
Tobias
is that the last meeting of the current council or how many meetings are left?
Link Mauve
One left, next week.
Kev
I have a quick AOB that I'd like to run up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes :)
Tobias
alright
dwd
We have a flagpole?
Tobias
8) AOB
dwd
AOB: We should totally get a flag.
SamWhited
+1
Link Mauve
AOB (shared by a few other members): vote to deprecate 0136.
Link Mauve
I’m +1 on that.
Tobias
that probably makes sense
SamWhited
I am still definitely +1
daniel
+1
dwd
+1
Tobias
+1
Tobias
Any further AOB?
Kev
I think it might be too early to do anything standards-track with "xmpp 2", but I'm thinking it'd be good to write up an Informational XEP that overviews the issues we're trying to solve, and the directions we're thinking of taking, so we can get something written and published. Then we can update it as the mailing list discussions advance, and eventually do the standards-track work required. Does any of Council think that's a reasonable or stupid idea? I'd feel better if we had something in a XEP somewhere, even non-normatively Informational.
Kev
(If anyone wonders, there is precedent for doing this)
SamWhited
Having some sort of document (informational XEP, wiki page? Whatever.) sounds sensible to me
Tobias
sounds sensible to me
Tobias
historically XEPs have been more tolerant to disk failure than wikis
dwd
I think any real attempt to make a genuine "XMPP 2.0" would be a disaster.
daniel
mhhh i think the wiki might be a better idea. i'm afraid that external people (people who are not that involved in the community) might get a wrong idea from a XEP
Link Mauve
Kev, sounds like a great idea, will be more “official” than the various wiki pages or burried Ge0rG emails.
daniel
even if it's just an 'informal' xep
Kev
dwd: You know that's not really what I mean :)
jonasw
so let’s choose a different title
jonasw
"Message Routing Improvements"
Link Mauve
daniel, informational*
Link Mauve
It would be formal.
Kev
daniel: Informational, describing the issues we're trying to solve. I think that being formal actually *is* a good thing.
jonasw
I share daniels concern when we have a XEP called "XMPP 2.0"
dwd
daniel, My understanding is that most of the suggestions are server-side, and the server community tends to be both smaller and more observant of the standards process, so we should be safer.
Kev
I'm genuinely offended that you really think I'm going to author a XEP called "XMPP 2.0" for this.
jonasw
Kev, don’t be
Link Mauve
^^
jonasw
I’m dehydrated
Link Mauve
Oh, thanks for reminding me I’m too.
Tobias
Any further AOB?
SamWhited
0280 changes and OMEMO have been cards forever
SamWhited
They appear to have stalled, should we do something with them?
Tobias
yeah we should
Tobias
don't know what though
jonasw
OMEMO is dealt with I think?
Tobias
i'm not so sure about that
Tobias
maybe Remko knows or so
dwd
jonasw, Dealt with? The outcome appears to have been for the proponents of sticking with libsignal only to ignore everybody else.
daniel
i think 0280 changes will be superseded by our 'xmpp 2.0' attempts
daniel
so we can probably just dismiss that
SamWhited
May I close that PR and say that we're planning a document on routing rules that will hopefully make things clearer?
jonasw
seems reasonable
daniel
maybe ask georg if he is fine with that but i guess he will be
Tobias
you could at least ask if the initiater of the PR is fine with that
Tobias
what daniel said
jonasw
they could always reopen if they are not
Link Mauve
Also that it should be handled by the new non-MAM-only rules.
SamWhited
Sounds good
Tobias
regarding OMEMO we should check back with Remko and Andy i guess
dwd
So what happens to XEP-0280 in the meantime?
Tobias
probably on ML or GH
daniel
end the last call. let it go back to experimental
Tobias
what daniel said
Tobias
+1
daniel
i feel like it's too early to deprecate
Link Mauve
dwd, it would be useful for it to get the same treatment as 0313, as in getting the specified archiving rules removed, IIRC it was the only complaint on the mailing list, so it could then go through LC again and become draft.
dwd
'280 has very few rules. That was the argument against it.
Tobias
could we move the rest of the discussions to the ML, this meeting is alrady running for 45 minutes?
Kev
The weasel words were so it could go to Draft.
Kev
Because we're free to set concrete rules later.
SamWhited
Since the routing rules discussion is probably much bigger than carbons, I think Carbons is firmly in the "good enough" category and should go to draft personally. If MAM supersedes it at a later date, we could deprecate.
SamWhited
MAM or some other routing rule change that's incompatible, that is.
dwd
What SamWhited says.
Kev
+1kev
Link Mauve
I would be fine with advancing it too.
daniel
me too
Tobias
yeah..something to discuss or vote on in a different meeting
Tobiasbangs the gavel
SamWhited
I'll add a card for next week
Tobias
thanks everybody
Tobias
thanks jcbrand for taking the notes
Link Mauve
Is 0280 still technically in LC, despite the expiration?
Link Mauve
If so we could vote on it right now.
Kev
Link Mauve: More or less. It's been implicitly extended by Council not doing much with it, I think.
Flow
I'm a little bit shocked by the sudden rush to advance 280 no matter what, it has still open issues that where raised on the LC ~9 months ago
Link Mauve
Damn, network outage right at the wrong time…
Tobias
i guess with more than 9 monhts in LC, it doesn't matter if you vote now or next week
Link Mauve
Sure.
dwd
Let's pop something on the list saying we'll vote to advance next week then.
danielhas left
SamWhited
Sent an email about 0313 not going to draft.
Tobias
thanks
jcbrandhas left
SamWhited
Also, apologies for being late on the markup vote. I will try to review it this week.
Tobiashas joined
SamWhited
Oops, I forgot that 0286 was also under LC. Moving that back to the council board for next week too.