XSF logo XMPP Council - 2017-11-29

  1. genofire has joined
  2. pep. has joined
  3. pep. has joined
  4. pep. has joined
  5. ralphm has left
  6. daniel has left
  7. daniel has joined
  8. Tobias has joined
  9. peter has left
  10. Kev has left
  11. jere has joined
  12. jere has joined
  13. jere has joined
  14. jere has joined
  15. Tobias has joined
  16. Tobias has left
  17. Tobias has joined
  18. Zash has left
  19. Zash has joined
  20. SamWhited has left
  21. ralphm has left
  22. Tobias has joined
  23. ralphm has left
  24. pep. has joined
  25. ralphm has left
  26. daniel has left
  27. daniel has joined
  28. ralphm has joined
  29. ralphm has left
  30. jonasw has left
  31. daniel has left
  32. SouL has left
  33. Tobias has joined
  34. ralphm has left
  35. Syndace has left
  36. Syndace has joined
  37. daniel has left
  38. ralphm has left
  39. daniel has left
  40. jcbrand has joined
  41. genofire has left
  42. ralphm has joined
  43. daniel has left
  44. Zash has left
  45. ralphm has joined
  46. daniel has left
  47. genofire has left
  48. vanitasvitae has left
  49. vanitasvitae has joined
  50. ralphm has left
  51. Ge0rG has joined
  52. Ge0rG SamWhited: from your XEP-0095 trello card, is "none of them supports SI but does not support Jingle" a typo?
  53. daniel has left
  54. daniel has left
  55. ralphm has left
  56. jere has left
  57. Zash has joined
  58. Zash has left
  59. ralphm has joined
  60. daniel has left
  61. Zash has joined
  62. daniel has left
  63. daniel has joined
  64. ralphm has left
  65. vanitasvitae has left
  66. vanitasvitae has joined
  67. SamWhited Ge0rG: I don't think so? I meant "none of them support only SI"
  68. Ge0rG SamWhited: ah, it just took me multiple attempts to parse that sentence
  69. SamWhited Yah, sorry, in retrospect that was very poorly worded
  70. Ge0rG SamWhited: feel free to change ;)
  71. jere has joined
  72. Kev has left
  73. Guus has joined
  74. Guus New councileers, kindly supply me (via PR, mail, IM, carrier pidgeon) with a short bio for the website. To avoid procrastination, please take two minutes to come up with two or three lines of text describing yourself when you read this. I'd be happy to modify the website on your behalf - just send me the raw text.
  75. Ge0rG I'm not original enough to come up with something that's sufficiently different from Daniel's bio :(
  76. Guus It doesn't have to be sufficinetly different.
  77. Guus as long as it describes you.
  78. Guus basically: what's your name, what do you do for a living, what nice XMPP affiliations do you have?
  79. mathieui Guus, say you’re a grumpy person that wants to make xmpp easier
  80. daniel has left
  81. jonasw itym Ge0rG
  82. Guus I'm a grumpy person tath wants to make xmpp easier.
  83. mathieui damn, I meant Ge0rG
  84. Guus :)
  85. Zash We are all grumpy and wishing to improve XMPP on this blessed day.
  86. Ge0rG Zash: you need more coffee
  87. Holger Maybe you could ask zinid to write your bios :-)
  88. jonasw lol
  89. mathieui lol
  90. Ge0rG Holger: Russian cursing would make me blush
  91. jonasw I wouldn’t recognize it.
  92. Guus Oh, come on. "Georg Lukas is a <whatdoyoudoforaliving>. Active since <date> within the XMPP community, he's the author of <name same XEPS>"
  93. Ge0rG is a full-time [IT security consultant](https://rt-solutions.de/en/home-2/), a vocal advocate of [Easy XMPP](https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Category:Easy_XMPP), the project janitor of [yaxim](https://yaxim.org) and the operator of the [public yax.im server](https://yaxim.org/yax.im/).
  94. Ge0rG Guus: ^
  95. Guus aweesome :)
  96. Ge0rG "He is also the one eternally blocking XEP-0280 because the rules are too vague."
  97. jonasw he didn’t go for my suggestion, pity :)
  98. jonasw I’d like to note that others do not have links to non-XMPP sites in their bios.
  99. Guus Who's out? Daniel?
  100. Guus Tobi too, right?
  101. Ge0rG jonasw: valid point. I saw a link to an employer and considered that valid, but of course it was a company working in XMPP
  102. jonasw Daniel is still in, Emmanuel Gil Peyrot is out
  103. jonasw but Kevin is back
  104. Guus ok, tx
  105. jonasw you could just look at the members page somebody helpfully updated ;-)
  106. daniel has left
  107. Guus https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/386
  108. Guus jonasw: you caught me being lazy :)
  109. Guus I wonder if we have an old bio for Kev somehwere
  110. Kev has joined
  111. jonasw Guus, git show aad70e88511b1ce523a09ea64070fceb5c8b147f
  112. Guus yup, just found that
  113. Guus filling in the missing links now
  114. jonasw I’d ask Kev beforehands though, to make sure everything is up-to-date :)
  115. Guus unless Kev has another text in midn
  116. Guus (I stripped the first sentence)
  117. Guus __Kevin Smith__ works at [Isode](http://isode.com) where he’s responsible for the [M-Link server](http://www.isode.com/products/m-link.html), other XMPP projects and work on the open-source [Swift](https://swift.im/) XMPP client. He was formerly the project leader on [Psi](http://psi-im.org/). Kevin is also the author of several [XMPP extensions](/extensions) and co-authored [XMPP: The Definitive Guide](http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596521271.do).
  118. jonasw isode has HTTPS now
  119. Ge0rG I like how the only things staying in my linediff are "https://", "and" and "the"
  120. Kev If you're suggesting text for my Council bio, that looks good to me (that's my stuff from last time, right?).
  121. Guus I've updated https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/386
  122. Guus Kev, yes. I left out the part referencing your past roles (as you were chair then, not sure if you are now)
  123. jonasw Guus, HTTPS the isode links and I thnik we’re good to go
  124. Guus jonasw: did you check if they worked? One link (I thnk psy) didn't.
  125. jonasw I did
  126. Kev I'm not chair now, no.
  127. jonasw (which is why I only mentioned "isode" :))
  128. Guus thanks :)
  129. Kev Thanks both.
  130. jonasw hit the large green button
  131. Guus Some checks haven’t completed yet
  132. jonasw right
  133. jonasw hm, I miss a "merge when checks complete" button, I think gitlab has that
  134. Guus I think I can simply merge
  135. Guus but it'd be nice to merge only if the checks are ok
  136. Guus done
  137. Ge0rG [Merge automatically at the least sensible moment]
  138. Guus thanks all.
  139. Guus You have now beat last years board by approximately 48 weeks. :)
  140. mathieui impressive
  141. jonasw in last years boards defense: they didn’t have such a keen SCAM/PR team leader :-)
  142. jonasw (at the beginning of their term)
  143. Ge0rG That the SCAM/PR team has been established is also partially in the responsibility of the old Board ;)
  144. ralphm has joined
  145. daniel has left
  146. genofire has joined
  147. genofire has joined
  148. peter has joined
  149. ralphm has left
  150. dwd has joined
  151. jcbrand Hi folks. I can't be in the meeting today, but I can take minutes afterwards by reading the chat logs.
  152. jcbrand Tobias ^
  153. daniel has left
  154. Kev jcbrand: dwd's the chair :)
  155. jcbrand Thanks Kev
  156. jcbrand dwd ^^^
  157. genofire has joined
  158. dwd jcbrand, If you're happy to do that, that'd be great.
  159. jonasw if the meeting will be at 16:00Z, I now know that I can do it too
  160. jonasw (that is, in six minutes or so)
  161. jcbrand the meeting of the minutes?
  162. jcbrand s/of/or
  163. Ge0rG ETA -5min, yeah.
  164. jonasw jcbrand, the meeting
  165. jonasw but do the minutes, yes
  166. jcbrand ok, I'll do the minutes then dwd
  167. jonasw ehh
  168. jonasw confusion
  169. jcbrand yes
  170. jcbrand :)
  171. jonasw I mean I can do the minutes live today, if that helps.
  172. jcbrand You're welcome to do them if you want to jonasw, or if you think it's more efficient
  173. peter has left
  174. jonasw I don’t know if it’s more efficient, but I’m certainly around and plan to follow the meeting anyways
  175. SamWhited Thanks! Live is good (IMO) since it means context doesn't get lost and you can ask for clarification if needed.
  176. jcbrand ok, let's do it live!
  177. dwd jonasw, Oh, even better.
  178. jonasw it’s settled then
  179. jcbrand thanks jonasw
  180. Kev Time for me to grab a water and get ready for the show, I guess.
  181. dwd Indeed: Kev, SamWhited, daniel, Ge0rG - 5 minute warning.
  182. dwd Well, three now.
  183. SamWhited Thank you 3
  184. peter has joined
  185. peter waves
  186. SamWhited o/
  187. dwd OK.
  188. jcbrand has left
  189. Kev 'tis time.
  190. dwd I call this meeting to session, then. (says he, grandly)
  191. daniel Hi
  192. dwd 1) Role Call:
  193. jonasw ("'tis time", the harpie cries?)
  194. dwd I see daniel, Kev, SamWhited - do we have a Ge0rG?
  195. Kev I be here.
  196. Ge0rG 👋
  197. dwd SamWhited, You *are* still here right?
  198. SamWhited Indeed
  199. dwd Ace. Full house.
  200. dwd So, items for a vote:
  201. dwd 1) XEP-0387, vote to mvoe to Draft.
  202. SamWhited +1
  203. SamWhited (naturally)
  204. daniel +1
  205. dwd I note that Kev thought we should restart the Last Call, but I believe that ended and I'm not convinced we need to revisit it.
  206. Kev Depends if we much care about process.
  207. Ge0rG +1 (I'm still against having Avatars in IM Core, but only because I'm a lazy client developer)
  208. jonasw technically the LC ended before the council changeover, at least according to the announcement made by the editor.
  209. Kev jonasw: There was no advancement, though, so it resets if we do things properly.
  210. jonasw I see
  211. Kev Anyway, I don't much care one way or the other, but I'll on-list if this is an advancement vote rather than LC.
  212. dwd Kev, Well, I do. But it's not clear to me that we would be following process by repeating a last call. It's surely in Proposed state, now?
  213. jonasw I don’t see a logical reason why council would be forced to re-start a last call; I wouldn’t expect new input just because council switched.
  214. Kev I'll on-list, then.
  215. dwd Kev, OK.
  216. moparisthebest has joined
  217. dwd I'm happy to +1 it, anyway.
  218. Ge0rG I'm +1 with either re-LC or advance, with a preference to the latter.
  219. dwd 2) Vote on deprecating XEP-0095 (note incorrect XEP number in agenda, sorry).
  220. dwd SamWhited wrote up some findings on deployment in the Trello card, if anyone's not noticed.
  221. SamWhited So I went through a list of clients (see the trello issue) last night looking for support for this
  222. SamWhited I did not find any client that supported SI alone
  223. SamWhited They all supported neither, Jingle, or Jingle and SI
  224. Kev I note that this is presumably deprecation in favour of 234, which is still Experimental, in case we care (I don't, immediately, I think).
  225. daniel SamWhited, i think there are some clients that only do SI
  226. dwd Is it worth Last Calling Jingle FT, then?
  227. Ge0rG Are there any technical reasons to favor 95 over 234? Complexity of implementation? Number of roundtrips?
  228. daniel but i'm unprepared and didn't research this
  229. SamWhited I checked quite a few popular ones and didn't find any, but I'm sure at least one or two old clients exist
  230. Ge0rG I haven't implemented either (as Sam rightfully pointed out in trello), so it's hard to decide right now.
  231. Kev I think an LC on 234 might be useful in informing deprecation of 95/96. Which isn't to say that I'm gating approval of deprecation on advancement.
  232. daniel Ge0rG, i think you can't fall back to ibb in SI
  233. daniel and the receiver can't suggest proxies
  234. Ge0rG daniel: is IBB still relevant in practice? Or is HTTP-Upload the new file transfer?
  235. daniel i'm just pointing out the differences between si and jingle
  236. Kev HTTP-Upload certainly can't replace the case where you need to fallback to IBB because you're crossing boundaries.
  237. SamWhited I do think it makes sense to consider pushing Jingle forward as well, but it seems clear to me that SI is functionally deprecated (Pidgin and Gajim both do Jingle, which is probably the vast majority of users), so we might as well recommend one thing IMO.
  238. daniel pidgin does jingle? file transfer!?
  239. Kev SamWhited: I agree, I just think we may as well wait a couple of weeks and see what LC on 234 comes up with.
  240. SamWhited daniel: it looked like it from browsing their source code, but I could be wrong
  241. Kev Equally, I don't object to deprecating 95/96 and LCing 234 concurrently, if that's what the general feeling is for.
  242. SamWhited Kev: I don't think we're in any rush, but I also think they're completely orthogonal and am generally for deprecating old things that look like recommendations but which aren't good for compatibility
  243. SamWhited I hadn't considered LCing 234, but I would also be for doing that as part of this if it's something people want.
  244. Kev LCs are cheap, and generally the best way to bring out feedback.
  245. SamWhited Indeed
  246. Ge0rG Kev: do you know of any practical use cases for IBB?
  247. Ge0rG Is there a way to have an LC for deprecating an XEP?
  248. Ge0rG Or can we piggy-back the deprecation warning of 95 on the 234-LC?
  249. Kev We can send out a mail, sure.
  250. dwd Ge0rG, I do - when crossing very tight network boundaries, there's a preference to having everything within a single TCP stream.
  251. Kev We can also un-deprecate if we've made a mistake.
  252. Kev So, meh, +1 on deprecating 95/96 and also on the AOB to LC 234 :)
  253. SamWhited I don't really see the point in seeking feedback on deprecation; that's why we're the council, to make recommenations, although in this case I think we're documenting what the community has decided, not really changing anything.
  254. daniel has left
  255. daniel +1 on deprecating SI
  256. Ge0rG daniel: 234 mandates IBB as a MUST have feature
  257. Ge0rG +1 on deprecating
  258. Ge0rG https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0234.html#impl-mti
  259. daniel Ge0rG, ?
  260. dwd Yes, I think +1 on deprecating both and a LC. Which I'll come to later.
  261. SamWhited +1 on deprecating 95/96 and to LC
  262. dwd OK. Unanimous on deprecating '95.
  263. dwd 3) ... and XEP-0096?
  264. Ge0rG +1 on deprecating
  265. Kev ^
  266. dwd I think we're all +1 there, but speak now if not.
  267. SamWhited oops, was getting ahead of myself…
  268. daniel +1
  269. SamWhited +1 to that too
  270. dwd And because I'm doing this out of the agenda order:
  271. dwd 4) Issue Last Call for XEP-0363 for advancement to Draft:
  272. SamWhited +1
  273. Kev +1 (which isn't to say I won't have feedback onlist)
  274. daniel +1
  275. dwd +1
  276. dwd Ge0rG, ?
  277. Ge0rG +1 for LC
  278. dwd Great, thanks.
  279. Ge0rG I've already written a comment re 363 to standards@ yesterday
  280. dwd 5) Trello Triage
  281. dwd Folks, if you look at the "Proposed Agendums" column, you'lkl notice two things.
  282. dwd Firstly, the plural of agendums is agenda, and that irritates me every time I see it. :-)
  283. Kev Please don't remove that bit of history.
  284. dwd Secondly, there's a lot of stuff here and much of it has been there a long time.
  285. dwd Kev, I have a keen sense of tradition as well as Latin grammar.
  286. daniel dwd, i think you can remove 280 and odr
  287. daniel oh for the 280 we wanted to ask Ge0rG for permission :-)
  288. Kev It's neither tradition or grammar, it's a reference to an old Council discussion, between me and Peter IIRC, about the singular of Agenda. It's terribly important for culture's sake :)
  289. Kev I think Datums may also have been involved.
  290. Ge0rG -1 on whatever you want to do to 280
  291. daniel Ge0rG, removing it from the agenda
  292. dwd Ge0rG, Well, I wanted to do nothing. So what should we do now you've vetod that?
  293. SamWhited I guess we have to do something to 0280?
  294. jonasw ( Kev, maybe add "[sic!]" to the column then, so that at least everybody knows that there’s some good story to know :))
  295. Kev 280 should go from our Agenda.
  296. Ge0rG dwd: there is a pending PR with "improved" rule wording. Merge it?
  297. daniel i just noticed 280 is on the agenda twice
  298. dwd Ge0rG, Is there consensus to?
  299. Ge0rG dwd: of course not
  300. SamWhited That was closed since Kev was going to work on a document WRT new routing rules
  301. SamWhited There is no longer a PR matching that agenda item, so it should go
  302. Ge0rG I've also investigated the current and potential routing rules extensively, and updated my slides at https://op-co.de/tmp/whats-wrong-with-xmpp-2017.pdf accordingly.
  303. jonasw cf. https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/434#issuecomment-344918631
  304. dwd OK. Moving on, then, in the absence of agreement.
  305. Ge0rG I still can't promise I will make it to the Summit, but maybe I can tele-present it.
  306. Ge0rG And I think it doesn't make sense to move on with 280 or 313 before that.
  307. dwd I see '186 and '352 are both out of last call but not advanced.
  308. dwd Ge0rG, I mean, I'm moving on with the meeting.
  309. SamWhited 0168 was waiting on some changes that peter wanted to make, IIRC?
  310. dwd Ge0rG, I'd like to finish this meeting before February.
  311. Ge0rG dwd: nothing wrong with that
  312. Ge0rG dwd: my "moving on" was unrelated to your "moving on", sorry for the confusion
  313. dwd Ge0rG, I thought it might be. :-)
  314. dwd SamWhited, WHat were the changes? Are they in a PR or on the list somewhere?
  315. SamWhited dwd: I don't recall
  316. dwd SamWhited, No, me neither.
  317. Ge0rG 186 was last addressed in http://logs.xmpp.org/council/2017-02-08#16:00:55
  318. SamWhited 0352 does not appear to have received any feedback; still looking for the mail about 0168
  319. SamWhited oops, too late. Ge0rG got it.
  320. dwd So, I propose that for both 186 and 352, we consider repeating a Last Call.
  321. Kev +1
  322. SamWhited I think we've done that already at least once, maybe twice for 352. I don't think we're likely to get more feedback the second (or third?) time
  323. Ge0rG I have a vague feeling that 352 is also related to the message routing Big Picture, in the context of "urgent" messages
  324. daniel csi received a lot of feedback
  325. SamWhited oh no, I'm sorry, this was an older LC, maybe it was unrelated
  326. SamWhited daniel: did it? I was just looking at see no replies to the LC email
  327. dwd Well, I'm going to put them on for next week's agenda for a LC vote.
  328. daniel i'm looking at an older thread from februrary 9th
  329. daniel no idea why the LC was repeated
  330. dwd We've got XEP-0084 deprecation, and also some stuff about reverting bookmarks to private XML. Anyone any idea on those?
  331. daniel there haven't been any changes and the old thread has positive feedback
  332. jonasw dwd, XEP-0084 isn’t really used in the wild and it is confusing for developers (I certainly was confused) because everybody™ uses vcards, apparently.
  333. SamWhited Link Mauve: care to elaborate on those?
  334. jonasw regarding bookmarks, I think the argument was that the change to PEP was a major break which should not have happened in a Draft XEP, it should’ve been a new XEP.
  335. jonasw I think that both are valid things for the council to discuss.
  336. dwd OK, on for next week.
  337. dwd So I think I understand the XHTML-IM and XEP-0286 ones. They can go on next week as well.
  338. dwd So, quickly since we're running short on time - AOB.
  339. dwd I think we agreed to vote on XEP-0234 for Last Call?
  340. dwd ... for which I'm +1.
  341. daniel +1
  342. SamWhited +1
  343. Ge0rG +1
  344. Kev Already +1d.
  345. dwd OK. Any other Any other Business?
  346. jonasw dwd, the LC mail I sent you
  347. jonasw but that’s not urgent I believe
  348. SamWhited XEP-0286 also had a LC end with minor feedback (all editorial things, IIRC) that was addressed.
  349. jonasw but in fact I think that was fully adressed, nevermind, dwd
  350. dwd jonasw, I know you wanted feedback on hash choices for the colour XEP, too. Can we discuss that next time?
  351. jonasw ah, yes
  352. jonasw sure
  353. dwd Right. Assuming no other business, then:
  354. dwd 7) Time of next
  355. Ge0rG +1W WFM
  356. SamWhited WFM
  357. dwd I cannot, unfortunately, make next week's meeting - I'll be stepping off stage after a talk at the time.
  358. Kev What Foxes Move.
  359. dwd Kev, Can you chair next week's?
  360. Kev Sure.
  361. dwd I'll *try* to join late, if possible.
  362. dwd Right, in that case we're done. Thanks all.
  363. Kev Thanks all.
  364. dwd 8) Ite, Meeting Est.
  365. jonasw the minutes go to which addresses? council@ and standards@?
  366. Kev Please.
  367. Ge0rG Thanks.
  368. jonasw minutes sent, thanks everyone
  369. peter SamWhited: Yes, there was list discussion about XEP-0186 early this year, and I have not yet made those changes. I think the changeset will be somewhat small, but I need to do that soon before my new job starts. Thanks for the reminder.
  370. SamWhited peter: thanks! I'll update the card so we don't forget again
  371. peter OK, great.
  372. jere has joined
  373. jere has joined
  374. ralphm has joined
  375. SamWhited has left
  376. Guus has left
  377. Tobias has joined
  378. jonasw has left
  379. ralphm has left
  380. SouL has left
  381. SouL has joined
  382. genofire has left
  383. jere has left
  384. jere has joined
  385. ralphm has joined
  386. jere has left
  387. genofire has left
  388. genofire has left
  389. jere has joined
  390. genofire has joined
  391. daniel has left
  392. genofire has joined
  393. genofire has joined
  394. daniel has left
  395. ralphm has left
  396. genofire has joined
  397. Tobias has joined
  398. daniel has left
  399. genofire has joined
  400. Tobias has left
  401. jonasw peter, you’ll have noticed that the tooling for sending emails etc. changed quite a bit. if you don’t mind, it’d be great if you familiarize yourself with it or make PRs for your changes, so that e.g. I can take care of that.
  402. daniel has left
  403. jonasw damn, I wanted to write that in the editors muc.
  404. genofire has left
  405. daniel has left
  406. Tobias has joined
  407. Tobias has left
  408. SouL has left
  409. SouL has left
  410. Kev has left
  411. daniel has left
  412. genofire_s7 has joined
  413. SouL has left
  414. ralphm has joined
  415. Kev has joined
  416. ralphm has left
  417. daniel has left
  418. Lance has joined
  419. pep. has joined
  420. pep. has joined
  421. Kev has left
  422. ralphm has left
  423. genofire_s7 has left
  424. genofire_s7 has joined
  425. SouL has left
  426. Lance has joined
  427. Kev has left
  428. daniel has left
  429. daniel has left
  430. genofire_s7 has left
  431. genofire_s7 has joined
  432. Zash has left
  433. Zash has joined
  434. genofire_s7 has left
  435. genofire_s7 has joined
  436. pep. has joined
  437. dwd has left
  438. Kev has joined
  439. Tobias has joined
  440. peter has left
  441. genofire_s7 has left
  442. genofire_s7 has joined
  443. peter has joined
  444. genofire_s7 has left
  445. jere has left
  446. genofire_s7 has joined
  447. jere has joined
  448. genofire_s7 has left
  449. genofire has left
  450. peter has left
  451. Zash has left
  452. jere has left
  453. jere has joined
  454. dwd has joined
  455. ralphm has left
  456. genofire has joined
  457. daniel has left
  458. jere has left
  459. jere has joined
  460. moparisthebest has joined
  461. SamWhited has left
  462. Kev has left
  463. daniel has left