XMPP Council - 2018-01-10

  1. SouL has left

  2. Ge0rG has left

  3. SouL has left

  4. Ge0rG has left

  5. Dave has left

  6. Dave has joined

  7. vanitasvitae has left

  8. SouL has left

  9. Ge0rG has left

  10. SouL has left

  11. Ge0rG has left

  12. Dave has left

  13. Dave has joined

  14. jere has joined

  15. SouL has left

  16. Ge0rG has left

  17. Ge0rG has left

  18. Dave has left

  19. Dave has joined

  20. Dave has left

  21. SouL has left

  22. Dave has joined

  23. SouL has left

  24. Ge0rG has left

  25. daniel has joined

  26. jere has left

  27. SouL has left

  28. Ge0rG has left

  29. Dave has left

  30. Dave has joined

  31. SamWhited has left

  32. jere has joined

  33. Tobias has joined

  34. Ge0rG has left

  35. SouL has left

  36. Tobias has joined

  37. SouL has left

  38. Ge0rG has left

  39. Dave has left

  40. Dave has joined

  41. Dave has left

  42. Dave has joined

  43. SamWhited has left

  44. SouL has left

  45. Ge0rG has left

  46. Dave has left

  47. Dave has joined

  48. Dave has left

  49. Dave has joined

  50. SouL has left

  51. Ge0rG has left

  52. SouL has left

  53. Ge0rG has left

  54. Dave has left

  55. Dave has joined

  56. Ge0rG has left

  57. SouL has left

  58. Dave has left

  59. Dave has joined

  60. Dave has left

  61. Dave has joined

  62. SouL has joined

  63. Ge0rG has left

  64. Ge0rG has left

  65. Dave has left

  66. Dave has joined

  67. Ge0rG has left

  68. Ge0rG has left

  69. Ge0rG has left

  70. Dave has left

  71. Dave has joined

  72. Ge0rG has left

  73. Dave has left

  74. Dave has joined

  75. Ge0rG has left

  76. Dave has left

  77. Dave has joined

  78. Dave has left

  79. Dave has joined

  80. Ge0rG has left

  81. Dave has left

  82. Dave has joined

  83. Dave has left

  84. Dave has joined

  85. Ge0rG has left

  86. Ge0rG has left

  87. Dave has left

  88. Dave has joined

  89. Dave has left

  90. Dave has joined

  91. Tobias has left

  92. Ge0rG has left

  93. Tobias has joined

  94. Dave has left

  95. Dave has joined

  96. Ge0rG has left

  97. Dave has left

  98. Dave has joined

  99. Dave has left

  100. Dave has joined

  101. Ge0rG has left

  102. Ge0rG has left

  103. Dave has left

  104. Dave has joined

  105. Dave has left

  106. Dave has joined

  107. ralphm has left

  108. Ge0rG has left

  109. ralphm has left

  110. ralphm has joined

  111. Ge0rG has left

  112. Dave has left

  113. Dave has joined

  114. Zash has left

  115. Dave has left

  116. Zash has left

  117. Dave has joined

  118. Zash has joined

  119. daniel has left

  120. daniel has joined

  121. Ge0rG has left

  122. daniel has left

  123. daniel has joined

  124. Dave has left

  125. Dave has joined

  126. Dave has left

  127. Dave has joined

  128. daniel has left

  129. daniel has joined

  130. Ge0rG has left

  131. Dave has left

  132. Dave has joined

  133. Dave has left

  134. Dave has joined

  135. Dave has left

  136. Dave has joined

  137. jonasw has left

  138. jonasw has joined

  139. ralphm has joined

  140. Ge0rG has left

  141. Dave has left

  142. Dave has joined

  143. daniel has left

  144. daniel has joined

  145. Ge0rG has left

  146. daniel has left

  147. daniel has left

  148. Dave has left

  149. Dave has joined

  150. daniel has left

  151. daniel has joined

  152. Dave has left

  153. Dave has joined

  154. Ge0rG has left

  155. Dave has left

  156. Dave has joined

  157. Ge0rG has left

  158. ralphm has joined

  159. ralphm has left

  160. Ge0rG has left

  161. Zash has left

  162. Ge0rG has left

  163. daniel has left

  164. daniel has joined

  165. Ge0rG has left

  166. Dave has left

  167. Dave has joined

  168. Dave has left

  169. Dave has joined

  170. ralphm has joined

  171. Ge0rG has left

  172. Ge0rG has left

  173. daniel has left

  174. Dave has left

  175. Dave has joined

  176. ralphm has left

  177. Ge0rG has left

  178. daniel has joined

  179. Ge0rG has left

  180. Dave has left

  181. Dave has joined

  182. ralphm has left

  183. Dave has left

  184. Dave has joined

  185. jere has joined

  186. jere has joined

  187. Ge0rG has left

  188. Flow has joined

  189. Zash has left

  190. Ge0rG has left

  191. Dave has left

  192. Dave has left

  193. Ge0rG has left

  194. ralphm has left

  195. Kev has left

  196. Kev has left

  197. daniel has left

  198. daniel has joined

  199. Ge0rG has left

  200. Dave has left

  201. ralphm has left

  202. genofire has joined

  203. genofire has joined

  204. Ge0rG has left

  205. genofire has joined

  206. genofire has joined

  207. genofire has joined

  208. genofire has joined

  209. Link Mauve has left

  210. genofire has joined

  211. genofire has joined

  212. genofire has joined

  213. genofire has joined

  214. genofire has joined

  215. genofire has joined

  216. genofire has joined

  217. genofire has joined

  218. genofire has joined

  219. genofire has joined

  220. genofire has joined

  221. genofire has joined

  222. genofire has joined

  223. genofire has joined

  224. genofire has joined

  225. genofire has joined

  226. genofire has joined

  227. genofire has joined

  228. genofire has joined

  229. genofire has joined

  230. genofire has joined

  231. genofire has joined

  232. genofire has joined

  233. genofire has joined

  234. genofire has joined

  235. genofire has joined

  236. genofire has joined

  237. genofire has joined

  238. genofire has joined

  239. genofire has joined

  240. genofire has joined

  241. genofire has joined

  242. genofire has joined

  243. genofire has joined

  244. genofire has joined

  245. genofire has joined

  246. genofire has joined

  247. genofire has joined

  248. genofire has joined

  249. genofire has joined

  250. Link Mauve has joined

  251. genofire has joined

  252. genofire has joined

  253. genofire has joined

  254. genofire has joined

  255. genofire has joined

  256. ralphm has joined

  257. genofire has joined

  258. genofire has joined

  259. genofire has joined

  260. genofire has joined

  261. Ge0rG has left

  262. genofire has joined

  263. genofire has joined

  264. genofire has joined

  265. genofire has joined

  266. genofire has joined

  267. genofire has joined

  268. genofire has joined

  269. ralphm has joined

  270. Dave has left

  271. Link Mauve has left

  272. vanitasvitae has joined

  273. Ge0rG has left

  274. Link Mauve has joined

  275. ralphm has joined

  276. Ge0rG has left

  277. Dave has left

  278. Dave has left

  279. daniel has left

  280. Ge0rG has left

  281. daniel has joined

  282. Kev has left

  283. daniel has left

  284. daniel has joined

  285. ralphm has joined

  286. Ge0rG has left

  287. Dave has left

  288. daniel has left

  289. daniel has joined

  290. Ge0rG has left

  291. ralphm has left

  292. daniel has left

  293. daniel has joined

  294. Ge0rG has left

  295. daniel has left

  296. daniel has joined

  297. daniel has left

  298. daniel has joined

  299. Dave has left

  300. Holger has left

  301. ralphm has joined

  302. Holger has joined

  303. Ge0rG has left

  304. ralphm has left

  305. ralphm has joined

  306. jere has left

  307. jere has joined

  308. moparisthebest has joined

  309. Ge0rG has left

  310. daniel has left

  311. moparisthebest has joined

  312. moparisthebest has joined

  313. daniel has joined

  314. ralphm has joined

  315. Dave has left

  316. Dave has left

  317. ralphm has joined

  318. daniel has left

  319. Dave has left

  320. Ge0rG has left

  321. ralphm has left

  322. daniel has joined

  323. ralphm has joined

  324. Ge0rG has left

  325. Kev

    https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/client-key.html would probably benefit from renaming as well.

  326. Zash

    Naming things

  327. Ge0rG

    Like user-invite?

  328. Dave

    Kev, Renaming?

  329. Kev

    I would expect a client to submit an automatically generated name for themselves in most instances, but have the user able to rename things in the event that they have, for example, two devices with Swift for iOS on.

  330. Kev

    That's how these things have typically worked in my limited experience.

  331. Kev

    Last-used is also useful in these instances.

  332. Ge0rG

    Kev: oh, renaming the client name.

  333. Ge0rG

    It might also make sense to differentiate long-term CLIENT-KEYs from short-term ones for resumption.

  334. Ge0rG

    It will be very confusing if a client name is present twice, with different keys, one for 24h and another for 30d.

  335. Holger has left

  336. Holger has joined

  337. Ge0rG

    If you read the proto-XEP in an unfortunate scrolling position, §3.2 reads like "Kev Revocation"

  338. Ge0rG has left

  339. Dave

    You can revoke Kev, but he has a TTL as well, as do we all.

  340. ralphm has joined

  341. Ge0rG has left

  342. Holger has joined

  343. Ge0rG has left

  344. Dave has left

  345. Dave has left

  346. ralphm has joined

  347. daniel has left

  348. genofire has joined

  349. ralphm has joined

  350. Ge0rG has left

  351. ralphm has left

  352. jere has joined

  353. genofire has joined

  354. Ge0rG has left

  355. Dave has left

  356. ralphm has joined

  357. daniel has left

  358. Dave

    Are we sitting comfortably?

  359. Ge0rG

    Yes, sir!

  360. Kev

    Then let's begin.

  361. Dave

    Kev, Glad someone got that. :-)

  362. Dave

    1) Role Call - Who's here?

  363. Kev

    I seem to be.

  364. daniel


  365. Dave

    SamWhited, ?

  366. Ge0rG

    still here

  367. Ge0rG has left

  368. Dave

    Green-ness from SamWhited but no response, so I'll assume absence for now.

  369. Dave

    We'll move on...

  370. Dave

    2) Agenda

  371. Dave

    As emailed, but we have one additional ProtoXEP to consider.

  372. Kev

    I suggest we don't, actually.

  373. SamWhited

    here now, sorry about that

  374. Dave

    As far as I can tell from the rules, I should open that vote now, but I'm happy to defer it if we think we ought to?

  375. Kev

    In as much as if we want to encourage people to be voting in meeting, rather than onlist (and I think we do), slipping things into the agenda without notice is counter to that.

  376. Ge0rG

    Dave: you skipped the initial #2 from your agenda email.

  377. Dave

    Ge0rG, I'm renumbering, sorry.

  378. daniel has left

  379. genofire has joined

  380. Ge0rG

    I have no strong opinions on hurrying my and MArc's protoXEP. It wasn't even yet officially announced to the ML.

  381. genofire has joined

  382. genofire has joined

  383. genofire has joined

  384. Dave

    Kev, If everyone's happy with that, we can push it off until next week.

  385. jonasw

    (it will be once the mailman passes my mail through; I sent it just now)

  386. genofire has joined

  387. Dave

    Ge0rG, Oh, in which case it's missed this meeting, so perfect.

  388. genofire has joined

  389. Kev

    (When I'll probably be on the road and will have to onlist anyway, unhelpfully)

  390. Dave

    So, moving on.

  391. genofire has joined

  392. genofire has joined

  393. Dave

    3) Did everyone have a nice Christmas?

  394. Kev

    So, long story...

  395. genofire has joined

  396. genofire has joined

  397. genofire has joined

  398. genofire has joined

  399. genofire has joined

  400. Kev

    But for the sake of brevity, yes thank you.

  401. Ge0rG

    Yes, without further detail.

  402. genofire has joined

  403. genofire has joined

  404. SamWhited

    On list.

  405. genofire has joined

  406. Dave

    4) ProtoXEP: PEP Avatar to vCard conversion.

  407. SamWhited

    ahem, I mean, "yes, thank you"

  408. genofire has joined

  409. Kev


  410. genofire has joined

  411. genofire has joined

  412. Dave

    Kev, Thanks.

  413. Ge0rG

    on list

  414. Kev

    I've got a few quibbles with this that I'll try to send out on standards@, but nothing to block publication.

  415. SamWhited


  416. genofire has joined

  417. Kev


  418. genofire has joined

  419. daniel


  420. genofire has joined

  421. Dave

    +1 from me.

  422. genofire has joined

  423. genofire has joined

  424. Dave

    I read that as everyone +1, and an on list from Ge0rG.

  425. genofire has joined

  426. Kev


  427. genofire has joined

  428. genofire has joined

  429. genofire has joined

  430. Dave

    5) Client Key Support: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/client-key.html

  431. Dave

    I'm obviously +1.

  432. genofire has joined

  433. genofire has joined

  434. Kev

    Could do with some extra stuff, I think, mentioned earlier, but good for publication. +1

  435. genofire has joined

  436. genofire has joined

  437. genofire has joined

  438. genofire has joined

  439. Ge0rG

    +1, even though we need to put some more thought into the network-interruption-during-auth issue.

  440. SamWhited


  441. genofire has joined

  442. genofire has joined

  443. genofire has joined

  444. genofire has joined

  445. Dave

    daniel, ?

  446. genofire has joined

  447. daniel

    on list

  448. genofire has joined

  449. genofire has joined

  450. genofire has joined

  451. genofire has joined

  452. Dave


  453. genofire has joined

  454. genofire has joined

  455. genofire has joined

  456. Dave

    6) TOTP 2FA - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/totp-2fa.html

  457. Kev


  458. Ge0rG

    on list.

  459. daniel

    on list as well

  460. genofire has joined

  461. Dave

    +1 from me too.

  462. genofire has joined

  463. SamWhited

    on list

  464. genofire has joined

  465. genofire has joined

  466. genofire has joined

  467. Kev

    I do think client-key needs examples of it being used.

  468. genofire has joined

  469. genofire has joined

  470. genofire has joined

  471. genofire has joined

  472. Ge0rG

    Kev: examples in the XEP text?

  473. Kev


  474. genofire has joined

  475. Dave

    Kev, Yeah, I agree. Needs examples in the I-D too.

  476. genofire has joined

  477. Dave

    Kev, Same with TOTP.

  478. genofire has joined

  479. genofire has joined

  480. genofire has joined

  481. genofire has joined

  482. genofire has joined

  483. genofire has joined

  484. Dave

    7) Deprecate XEP-0126: Invisibility

  485. genofire has joined

  486. Kev

    What was the background to this proposal?

  487. genofire has joined

  488. Kev

    (I'm almost certainly +1, but just for flavour...)

  489. genofire has joined

  490. Dave

    I'm +1 for this, we should be advising people to do invisibility via Privacy Lists anymore.

  491. genofire has joined

  492. genofire has joined

  493. Kev

    Insert negation of choice.

  494. genofire has joined

  495. genofire has joined

  496. Dave

    Kev, I assumed this was SamWhited's general push toward deprecating old stuff.

  497. genofire has joined

  498. Dave

    Kev, And yes. Shouldn't be advising.

  499. Dave has left

  500. genofire has joined

  501. Dave has left

  502. SamWhited

    Yah, background is that privacy lists are deprecated and there are multiple ways to do invisibility which is confusing (I had this specifically brought up at a meetup by some random people)

  503. genofire has joined

  504. genofire has joined

  505. Kev


  506. SamWhited


  507. genofire has joined

  508. Ge0rG

    What is the encouraged way to do invisibility?

  509. genofire has joined

  510. genofire has joined

  511. Kev

    Ge0rG: With a cloak from Hogwarts.

  512. genofire has joined

  513. Dave

    Ge0rG, XEP-0186 from memory. I may have the number wrong, but it's somewhere around there.

  514. genofire has joined

  515. daniel


  516. genofire has joined

  517. Ge0rG

    Kev: that can be circumvented with the Marauder's Map.

  518. SamWhited

    Ge0rG: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0186.html

  519. Kev


  520. genofire has joined

  521. genofire has joined

  522. Dave

    Kev, Did I mention that Hogwart's is being closed? Or at least, the Great Hall part of it?

  523. genofire has joined

  524. Dave

    But anyway.

  525. genofire has joined

  526. genofire has joined

  527. genofire has joined

  528. Dave

    I see a +1 from everyone except Ge0rG.

  529. genofire has joined

  530. Ge0rG

    I suppose this is an "on list" from me then, I don't want to rush things without skimming through both XEPs

  531. genofire has joined

  532. genofire has joined

  533. genofire has joined

  534. genofire has joined

  535. genofire has joined

  536. genofire has joined

  537. genofire has joined

  538. genofire has joined

  539. genofire has joined

  540. genofire has joined

  541. Dave

    8) Trello Tidy

  542. genofire has joined

  543. Ge0rG has left

  544. genofire has joined

  545. genofire has joined

  546. Dave

    A few things in Trello I'm not clear about the status of:

  547. genofire has joined

  548. genofire has joined

  549. genofire has joined

  550. Ge0rG

    BTW, who is taking notes?

  551. Dave

    a) There's a bunch of stuff in Pending that I think has expired and/or been voted on.

  552. genofire has joined

  553. Dave

    Ge0rG, Yeah, nobody volunteered so I'll write something up later.

  554. Ge0rG

    Dave: thanks

  555. Ge0rG

    Are pep-vcard-conversion and "Deprecating 84" in conflict?

  556. SamWhited

    Yes, but even if we decide to deprecate one of the avatar formats I don't think it hurts to have the informational work around available for a while

  557. Dave

    In particular, I think we were bound by rules to repeat the Last Call for XEP-0387, but I don't see that as having happened.

  558. Dave has left

  559. Dave

    But also, people have continued commenting on the previous Last Call thread.

  560. SamWhited

    I am not interested in addressing feedback that came in after the last call was over. Forcing it to be restarted and never getting this out the door is starting to drive me mad. Feedback will be addressed in a future version (lots of it is very good), but not in this one unless someone else wants to take over.

  561. Ge0rG

    The Last-but-one Call?

  562. Dave

    SamWhited, I'm fine with that.

  563. Dave

    SamWhited, I'm just trying to figure out if we can actually vote it through at this point.

  564. Ge0rG

    According to my mail log, the last Last Call was going from December 7th to December 21st, and there was no feedback after December 11th.

  565. Dave

    Ge0rG, I can't find that Last Call announced on the mailing list, which is my problem. Was it?

  566. Dave

    Oh, wait, yes it was.

  567. Dave

    Title changed, of course.

  568. Ge0rG

    Dave: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-December/034019.html

  569. Dave

    So yes, we *can* vote on this (and I should have put it on the agenda, sorry)

  570. Ge0rG

    So while the discussion was under the Last-but-one Call email thread, I don't think the content should be ignored.

  571. Kev

    We can vote, but I don't think the feedback there has been incorporated as of yet.

  572. SamWhited

    It will be incorporated in the 2019 suites since it came in after the LC had ended.

  573. Kev

    https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-December/034019.html - that last call?

  574. Ge0rG

    SamWhited: are you speaking of the October LC?

  575. Dave

    SamWhited, No, looks like there was a Last Call open at the time.

  576. SamWhited

    I don't recall. I'm reasonably sure I had all feedback addressed, then the council changed before the voting was finished and now we have another LC and more feedback.

  577. Dave

    SamWhited, Sounds about right. Can you incorporate that feedback and we'll vote (and hopfully publish) next week?

  578. Kev

    I think that flow of events is correct, but the implication that the more recent feedback doesn't need addressing doesn't seem right to me.

  579. SamWhited

    No, I would like us to vote on the current form. We can address anything else remaining in next years.

  580. Kev

    That seems to be a sake of process for the sake of process.

  581. Ge0rG

    SamWhited: are you going to keep a list of open feedback items for next year's Compliance Suite?

  582. SamWhited

    I disagree, restarting the LC seems to be process for the sake of process

  583. SamWhited

    I just want compliance suites to actually exist in the year that is in the title.

  584. Ge0rG

    I don't know, without re-reading the whole thread and the XEP, which feedback is still pending and needs to be carried over into 2019.

  585. Kev

    I mean issuing a vote when you already know that one of Council has outstanding feedback that isn't getting addressed seems to be a redundant action.

  586. Kev

    If I issue a PR to address my feedback, does that make this any easier?

  587. Kev

    Not that I have any spare cycles.

  588. daniel has left

  589. SamWhited

    No, it doesn't, the point is to not go through multiple more weeks with multiple more changes which will just lead to more people having disagreements and more revisions. At some point we just have to say "this is good enough for this year". That *should* have happened before this year started, and it was on track to, then an excuse was made to continue putting it off and submit feedback late.

  590. Ge0rG has left

  591. Kev

    The way I see this, me being on Council requires me to do a thorough review of it before advancement. I did that, and found stuff that needs addressing. Whether that was given during the renewed LC, or at vote time, doesn't change that. But doing it during LC gives the opportunity to address it before the vote.

  592. Dave

    SamWhited, Yes, we do have to decide when to say it's good enough. And it's Council that does that, via the process in XEP-0001. I don't think ignoring feedback is a solution here.

  593. Dave

    ANyway, we're running out of time, so I'll move on for now.

  594. Ge0rG

    Kev: if your feedback is not incorporated before the vote, does that imply a -1?

  595. Dave

    I think we'll skip to:

  596. Kev

    Ge0rG: Well, yes. Unless the discussion leads to my feedback being wrong-or-such.

  597. Dave

    9) AOB

  598. Ge0rG

    Maybe we can arrange for a vote of the XEP as-is, _now_, and have Kev make the PR and Sam start a "Compliance Suite 2019" with the feedback incorporated in the next weeks?

  599. Kev

    No real AOB here. I'll send out a request for agenda for the Summit shortly, but nothing much for Council to do about that.

  600. Ge0rG

    We've had a Council re-election and holiday season block progress for some time already.

  601. daniel

    AOB: publish-options

  602. daniel

    can we vote on one of the PRs

  603. daniel

    preferably the latest one

  604. Dave

    daniel, We can; I saw these were voted on, but the vote was deferred for more feedback from the list - but I didn't see any discussion there.

  605. Ge0rG

    daniel: IIRC you wanted to ask for comments from the community?

  606. Ge0rG

    As I lack experience with pubsub and understanding of the complexities of 0060, I'd like to hear from parties implementing this and/or impacted by the change.

  607. daniel

    Ge0rG, i wanted to ask for comments? i already did. that was mostly ignored. so i assume people either don't care or it's 'above their heads'/the don't have an opinion on that

  608. daniel

    not sure how waiting longer or bumping the thread will be any help

  609. daniel

    at some point council will have to make a decision

  610. daniel

    as you can't force 'the community' to have an opinion on that

  611. Dave

    daniel, OK, but the vote was explicitly deferred in order to gain feedback. Hence I didn't put it on this week's agenda.

  612. genofire has joined

  613. Ge0rG

    I don't know of PubSub implementations outside of the ones represented by xsf@ lurkers.

  614. genofire has joined

  615. daniel

    Dave, how would you like me to gather feedback then?

  616. genofire has joined

  617. genofire has joined

  618. Dave

    daniel, If you're asking for a vote in the absence of community feedback, I think I'd want to vote on-list to find the time to really study these in any case.

  619. genofire has joined

  620. genofire has joined

  621. genofire has joined

  622. genofire has joined

  623. Dave

    daniel, I'm not - I wasn't in that meeting. I'm just going by the decision made in my absence. Let's vote on this next week, feedback or not.

  624. genofire has joined

  625. Ge0rG

    Do we have council members who are working on affected implementations, besides of daniel?

  626. genofire has joined

  627. Kev

    I think anything in AOB that's going to need Council to do reading to get context in their heads is going to result on on-list at best, so may as well be a formal item in the following meeting. But I can onlist.

  628. genofire has joined

  629. Kev

    Ge0rG: All pubsub implementations are affected, I think. So yes.

  630. genofire has joined

  631. genofire has joined

  632. genofire has joined

  633. Ge0rG

    Kev: it would be great to have feedback from those Council members, then. On list.

  634. daniel

    Dave, i'm more than fine with council members taking their time. i just want them to take that time and not prolong this for ages

  635. genofire has joined

  636. genofire has joined

  637. SamWhited

    I'm all for voting on list, this meeting or next. I don't think we're going to get any community feedback on this as XEP-0060 is just too complicated and very few people understand it and even fewer have implemented it.

  638. genofire has joined

  639. genofire has joined

  640. daniel

    or come up with a strategy to gather feedback from people who work with pubsub

  641. Dave

    daniel, It'll be on next week. That's the first of the XEP-0060 trello cards, is it?

  642. genofire has joined

  643. genofire has joined

  644. daniel


  645. genofire has joined

  646. genofire has joined

  647. Dave


  648. Kev

    If someone starts a thread, or bumps the current thread, asking for feedback, I'll give mine there. Then maybe that will encourage others to give feedback on standards@. Or maybe it won't, but it's a chance.

  649. genofire has joined

  650. Dave

    10) Next meeting

  651. genofire has joined

  652. Dave

    Same time next week?

  653. Ge0rG

    +1W WFM

  654. genofire has joined

  655. Kev

    I can't do next week, but enjoy yourselves without me.

  656. SamWhited


  657. Dave

    Kev has given apologies already, anyone else?

  658. genofire has joined

  659. genofire has joined

  660. genofire has joined

  661. genofire has joined

  662. genofire has joined

  663. genofire has joined

  664. Dave

    I'll take that as a no.

  665. genofire has joined

  666. Dave

    So I think we're done.

  667. Dave

    11) Ite, Meeting Est.

  668. genofire has joined

  669. Dave

    Now I can go write the minutes.

  670. genofire has joined

  671. genofire has joined

  672. Kev

    Thanks all.

  673. genofire has joined

  674. genofire has joined

  675. genofire has joined

  676. genofire has joined

  677. genofire has joined

  678. genofire has joined

  679. genofire has joined

  680. genofire has joined

  681. genofire has joined

  682. genofire has joined

  683. genofire has joined

  684. genofire has joined

  685. genofire has joined

  686. genofire has joined

  687. genofire has joined

  688. genofire has joined

  689. Ge0rG has left

  690. genofire has joined

  691. genofire has joined

  692. genofire has joined

  693. genofire has joined

  694. genofire has joined

  695. genofire has joined

  696. genofire has joined

  697. genofire has joined

  698. genofire has joined

  699. genofire has joined

  700. genofire has joined

  701. genofire has joined

  702. genofire has joined

  703. genofire has joined

  704. genofire has joined

  705. ralphm has joined

  706. genofire has joined

  707. genofire has joined

  708. genofire has joined

  709. genofire has joined

  710. genofire has joined

  711. genofire has joined

  712. genofire has joined

  713. genofire has joined

  714. genofire has joined

  715. genofire has joined

  716. genofire has joined

  717. genofire has joined

  718. genofire has joined

  719. genofire has joined

  720. genofire has joined

  721. genofire has joined

  722. genofire has joined

  723. genofire has joined

  724. genofire has joined

  725. genofire has joined

  726. genofire has joined

  727. genofire has joined

  728. genofire has joined

  729. genofire has joined

  730. genofire has joined

  731. genofire has joined

  732. genofire has joined

  733. genofire has joined

  734. genofire has joined

  735. genofire has joined

  736. genofire has joined

  737. genofire has joined

  738. genofire has joined

  739. genofire has joined

  740. genofire has joined

  741. genofire has joined

  742. genofire has joined

  743. genofire has joined

  744. genofire has joined

  745. genofire has joined

  746. SamWhited

    So, RE Compliance Suites: I think it is important to work to a deadline on these. The beginning of the year may be an arbitrary deadline, but if we're going to consistently issue guidelines we can't keep doing a repeat of the 2010 or 2012 ones where they end up being in experimental for 5 years (or even half of a year). This is not a normal XEP where we can never make changes again after final and once the community adopts it it's hard to change, we have another shot every year. I hope that clarifies my position a bit.

  747. SamWhited

    If a council member thinks that it would be harmful to issue these as guidelines, they can of course -1 but I don't think any of the problems with it are that serious.

  748. Dave has left

  749. Dave has left

  750. daniel has left

  751. Dave has left

  752. Kev

    I think missing things out, or recommending the 'wrong' thing (e.g. '84 instead of '153, not doing '49/'54) can be actively harmful for interop, as we expect new implementations to use these specs as a 'what do I need to implement at the moment', which is why I care. You've noted before that it's confusing when there are multiple options on the table and people don't know which to choose. If we point people in the wrong direction for the current reality with the compliance suites, that's adding to the confusion.

  753. Kev

    It's not the same as having some nice feature that we could include, but don't, for things like that, in my view.

  754. jonasw

    I think the argument was that the compliance suites should posit how things *should* be, not how they currently are?

  755. Ge0rG

    Isn't it somewhere in between? What is needed for interop, and what is needed for a nice future?

  756. Kev

    How far ahead? The 153/84 thing isn't clear at all. '49 has been the status quo for a decade and a half, and shows no signs of changing, etc.

  757. SamWhited

    Then that feedback should have been sent when it was in LC

  758. Kev

    If we have compliance suites where implementing the suggestions means that you can't interoperate with the same features as everyone else does them, that seems deeply unhelpful unless we're very clear that it's aspirational.

  759. Ge0rG has left

  760. Kev

    SamWhited: There's two things with that. 1) There has been a new LC, triggered by the change of Council, since. 2) Council's review on advancement is not the same as LC feedback from the public.

  761. SamWhited

    1 is process for processes sake and I don't think ever should have happened

  762. SamWhited

    2 I disagree, council should have gotten their feedback in before it came to them for a vote so that it could have been addressed

  763. Kev

    I wasn't Council for the previous LC, and it hasn't been voted yet. Which is one of the reasons for (1).

  764. SamWhited

    If there is disagreement and it's not addressed they are obviously free to -1, but we should still get feedback to the author in a timely manner instead of giving it when we -1

  765. SamWhited

    I don't see why your feedback would change because you are or are not council

  766. Kev

    Did you do the same level of review of all XEPs going through the process before you were on Council, honestly?

  767. Kev

    The level of review expected by Council is not the same as that expected by every other person in the community.

  768. SamWhited

    I suppose that's fair; if I reviewed them at all I gave the same amount, but I didn't review all of them before I was council.

  769. Kev

    The level of review expected by Council is not the same as that expected from every other person in the community.

  770. Kev

    The reason I took a break from Council, as it happens, was purely because I couldn't afford to spend the many hours every week it often takes me to be on Council.

  771. SamWhited

    Either way, this is about deadlines and I think we should have made the deadline and should still get these out as quickly as possible even if they're not perfect. I don't see any major problems with them as they are now (for compatibility or otherwise) so I would like to have it voted on. If it's -1ed because someone disagrees then so be it.

  772. jonasw

    (FWIW, this was the final argument which convinced me to issue the LC, I didn’t do that for process’ sake)

  773. Ge0rG

    So how can we move on from here?

  774. Kev

    If this had made it through previous Council, this wouldn't have come up, but as things stand, the XEP is in front of me and as Council I do have to make the vote I think is appropriate - and I do think some of the recommendations in there will add to confusion and therefore be potentially harmful.

  775. Kev

    I have offered to propose the changes I think are needed myself, to try to unstall this, but I can't force that.

  776. SamWhited

    More harmful than continuing to not have compliance suites even though we could immediately fix them in the experimental suites for next year?

  777. Kev

    (I really don't want to, because I'm time-poor, but I will).

  778. Kev

    We could immediately fix them in the suites for this year, and have them advanced, too.

  779. Kev

    The time to write the changes for the current text is presumably shorter than to write a new protoXEP, and we've not voted on either yet.

  780. SamWhited

    But that will take multiple more weeks and I think it's much more important to have compliance suites issued in a timely manner.

  781. Kev

    Does it need to?

  782. Kev

    It would be uncomfortable for me to fit submitting a patch in before next meeting, but I will if that's the only way to unstick this.

  783. jonasw

    FWIW, there’s no need for a new LC if changes are incorporated

  784. Kev

    Vote happens next Wednesday. Everyone other than me votes in meeting. I vote onlist at the start of the following week. 12 days and it's done.

  785. Kev

    jonasw: I know.

  786. jonasw

    if I’m reading XEP-0001 correctly

  787. jonasw

    I’m not sure that SamWhited knows.

  788. SamWhited

    I am aware

  789. jonasw

    so I don’t see how this will take weeks.

  790. jonasw

    update today, vote next week, 1w exactly, done.

  791. SamWhited

    I am just sick to death of us having to have everything be perfect and not being able to meet a simple deadline.

  792. SamWhited

    As soon as there are new changes there will be someone else mad about it and we'll bike shed for another month. I hope to be proven wrong on that, of course.

  793. Kev

    I think the only deadline is actually the Author having addressed feedback before Council votes on it ;)

  794. jonasw

    SamWhited, no, they won’t be asked

  795. SamWhited

    And that was done, then the council didn't vote for weeks and made up an excuse to put it back into LC again.

  796. jonasw

    well, okay, they will be asked implicitly, but I doubt that there will be much going on w.r.t. to that.

  797. Kev

    I think you're wrongly fixating on LC here.

  798. Kev

    The only thing the LC has meant is that my feedback went to list as LC feedback, rather than as justification for -1.

  799. moparisthebest

    as an aside I think SamWhited is right, for instance the new https://dino.im/ website advertises "compliant with the official XMPP Compliance Suites 2016." and to someone not deeply involved in XSF that looks like it's 2 years out-dated

  800. Ge0rG

    With the LC over, one way or another, Council are the only ones who are allowed (and required) to provide feedback now.

  801. Kev

    In both cases the Author's expected to address it to the satisfaction of Council.

  802. Kev

    Ge0rG: Well, that's not true. Anyone is allowed to provide feedback at any time.

  803. Ge0rG

    Kev: damn.

  804. Kev

    LC is a request for a specific type of feedback, at a specific time. But standards@ is not muted the rest of the time.

  805. jonasw

    but council does not need to issue a new LC

  806. jonasw

    council is free to advance a XEP in its current state, no matter which pending feedback there is

  807. ralphm has joined

  808. SamWhited

    It was addressed to the satisfaction of council as far as I understood it, then the goalposts shifted and here we are over a week into 2018 and we still only have 2016 compliance suites.

  809. Kev

    If it was addressed to the satisfaction of old Council, surely it would have been advanced by now?

  810. Kev

    But regardless, current state is, I think:

  811. SamWhited

    One would think. These are also the same compliance suites that should have been 2017 ones but we kept bikeshedding details until eventually I just renamed them 2018.

  812. Kev

    Sam wants a compliance suite 2018 to be advanced.

  813. Ge0rG has left

  814. Kev

    Kev wants changes made to compliance suites 2018. Kev wants compliance suites 2018 advanced.

  815. Kev

    OK. So old Council failed. That can be a thing.

  816. Kev

    New Council are here, and there is a clear path to how to get this advanced imminently.

  817. Kev

    I don't currently understanding why you don't want to take it.

  818. Kev

    I also don't English, obviously.

  819. Kev

    If it's that you think the changes I'm proposing are actively wrong, I don't think that was reflected in your replies to date.

  820. SamWhited

    We should have voted weeks ago, we should have voted this week, etc. every time there is some excuse why we should vote later. More changes will just lead to more delays.

  821. SamWhited

    But I do think the feedback was good, FWIW, just not worth spending more time on until next years.

  822. Kev

    I don't think it was on Dave's agenda for voting this week.

  823. jonasw

    SamWhited, do you really think that people are actively making up excuses to sabotage the compliance suites to be published?

  824. SamWhited

    There has been a card on trello for months asking for a vote.

  825. jonasw

    SamWhited, do you really think that people are actively making up excuses to sabotage the compliance suites from being published?

  826. SamWhited

    jonasw: not in a malicious way, but yes

  827. Kev

    I get, I totally get, the frustration in this dragging on. But I'm offering an out here by doing the work needed to get this through.

  828. jonasw

    what is a non-malicious way of doing that?

  829. Kev

    And entirely not because I love doing XEP work.

  830. Kev

    So, separating 'how we got here' from 'where we go next', I'm not currently clear why you would rather it go to vote next week in a form it'll be rejected, rather than go to vote next week in a form I have no reason to anticipate won't be accepted.

  831. jonasw

    Kev, if you can summarize in two sentences what changes you want, I’ll make a PR for you.

  832. Kev

    jonasw: Thanks. I think at the point I've trawled my previous comments and got it down to two sentences, I may as well submit the PR, but I very much appreciate the sentiment.

  833. jonasw


  834. SamWhited

    (just got pulled into an actual work meeting, sorry, maybe be unresponsive for an hour or so)

  835. Dave has left

  836. Dave has left

  837. Dave has left

  838. Ge0rG has left

  839. daniel has left

  840. SamWhited has left

  841. daniel has left

  842. Ge0rG has left

  843. jere has joined

  844. Kev

    https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/554 seems to be stuck in limbo, after we agreed on needing it in Council last year. I think that needs a Council vote too.

  845. Kev adds to agenda.

  846. ralphm has joined

  847. Ge0rG

    Kev: thanks

  848. Dave has left

  849. Ge0rG has left

  850. daniel has left

  851. Ge0rG has left

  852. Tobias has joined

  853. Tobias has joined

  854. Dave has left

  855. Ge0rG has left

  856. Dave has left

  857. Dave has left

  858. ralphm has joined

  859. Ge0rG has left

  860. Kev

    I have submitted a PR that addresses my feedback, and which I will happily +1 if merged.

  861. Kev


  862. Kev

    From the PR message:

  863. Kev

    This addresses, I believe, all the issues I raised. Where I was wrong (84), or it was contentious (220), I've dropped the point. Where Sam felt it was worth watering down (needing 153, but only read-only), I've done so.

  864. Kev

    If other Council folks would be kind enough to review this and check if I've screwed anything up, or this would alter their +1 of the spec, please let me know early. Ideally before Sam reviews it, to make this painless for him.

  865. Kev

    Assuming this gets merged in time, I suggest a vote on advancement next week.

  866. Kev

    daniel, Ge0rG, Dave: ^

  867. Kev

    I will be mostly out of action between morning Friday and next meeting, so if people have things I need to address, please let me know by then.

  868. Kev has left

  869. Ge0rG

    Damn. Reading those diffs is really a painful excercise in following up indirections.

  870. Ge0rG

    We should add aliases &yes; and &no; for the #1000x codes

  871. Zash

    The what

  872. Ge0rG has left

  873. Dave has left

  874. Dave has left

  875. Ge0rG

    So ✓ is "yes" and ✕ is "no", and you need to know the order of the columns from elsewhere in the document

  876. Zash has left

  877. Ge0rG

    Kev: so you've added 223 to the "IM / Advanced Server" profile, but not 222.

  878. Zash

    How was it you fetched PRs from git?

  879. SamWhited

    Ge0rG: if you know XML-y things I would love suggestions on how to fix that… I constantly put things in the wrong place because I couldn't remember what the number of each one was.

  880. Ge0rG

    Zash: `git fetch <remote> pull/25/head:<localname>`

  881. SamWhited

    Although, it's always UTF-8 encoded no? Maybe I just don't need to escape them… not sure why I didn't think of that before, I should try that.

  882. Ge0rG

    SamWhited: might be as easy as this: `<!ENTITY yes "&#10003;">`

  883. SamWhited

    oh, that's a good idea too…

  884. SamWhited

    Thanks, I'll update that in next years.

  885. Ge0rG

    SamWhited: great!

  886. Ge0rG

    SamWhited: I hope you keep track of the pending changes for 2019.

  887. Kev

    Kev: so you've added 223 to the "IM / Advanced Server" profile, but not 222. Yes, because 223 is needed for 48, but this might not be clear. It was already required, I just called it out.

  888. Ge0rG

    Kev: 48 RECOMMENDs 223, but it does not REQUIRE it.

  889. Ge0rG

    I still think it is good to call out support for 223, but then we should also add 222.

  890. Ge0rG

    Anyway, I'm okay with any subset, including the empty one, of {222, 223} be part of CS2018.

  891. Kev

    Ge0rG: I'm trying to keep the diff as small as possible while addressing my comments. If you really want 222 if 223 is added, I'd be inclined to remove 223, but I think what I've got there is helpful.

  892. Kev

    Ok, thanks. In that case, I'd go with what's there.

  893. Ge0rG has left

  894. Kev

    I was pondering whether to have 223 as a client or not. I'm happy to make that change if people want.

  895. Ge0rG

    Kev: my feeling tells me to replace the "N/A", but then again I haven't implemented PEP yet anyway.

  896. Dave has left

  897. Dave has left

  898. ralphm has joined

  899. Ge0rG has left

  900. Dave has left

  901. Dave has left

  902. ralphm has left

  903. Ge0rG has left

  904. ralphm has joined

  905. pep.

    ooi, why are the compliance suites dated by year, and not versioned? Is there a rationale somewhere?

  906. pep.

    I think that forces imaginary deadlines for no reason

  907. daniel

    pep.: so people see that this is recent and is actively being worked on

  908. daniel

    Come the year 2022 you have no idea whether version 3 of the compliance suite is still current or something that hasn't been worked on in years

  909. pep.

    I see your point, but I don't know if end-users need to know or care. I don't think they should even have to know about XMPP in the first place

  910. pep.

    Developers will know what version X of XEP-Y means

  911. daniel

    I wasn't talking about end users

  912. daniel

    And no developers don't know

  913. Zash

    Weren't compliance suites supposed to be for marketing or certification?

  914. pep.

    daniel, that is sad :/

  915. daniel

    Zash: they can if you want them to

  916. daniel

    I have a course you can let your employer pay for

  917. pep.

    But yes that makes sense for marketing etc.

  918. daniel

    That makes you a certified xmpp developer

  919. pep.

    You give them a medal? :P

  920. daniel


  921. pep.


  922. daniel

    People love certificates. HR loves certificates

  923. daniel

    Everyone has a masters degree these days. But a certificate will set you apart

  924. pep.

    I don't, and most at work here don't

  925. pep.

    Still I think we're doing ok

  926. pep.

    But yes sadly I get that's how it is

  927. moparisthebest

    I'm positive it's not universal at all, but I've worked with 2 devs that had masters degrees and both were the worst devs I've ever worked with 😛

  928. moparisthebest

    compared to the rest of the devs I work with with only bachelors degrees or no degrees

  929. Ge0rG has left

  930. Syndace has left

  931. Syndace has joined

  932. daniel

    But in all seriousness: most normale developers (normal as in outside the xsf) believe xmpp an unnavigateable jungle of XEPs. Telling them here are the 8 xeps you should implement if you want your product to be compatible is really useful. And has nothing to do with just marketing

  933. pep.

    daniel, don't get me wrong, I know compliance suites are useful

  934. daniel

    You can't assume that the average developer will know 400 xeps or do the research into what xeps are implemented by other clients

  935. pep.

    daniel, don't get me wrong, I also think compliance suites are useful

  936. pep.

    I would hope developers would aim for some interoperability with other clients and servers

  937. pep.

    If their product is out in the open

  938. moparisthebest

    but also used for marketing I think is good, but can also go wrong, dino.im mentions it's compliant with 2016 suites, which to everyone not in XSF makes it look 2 years behind

  939. pep.

    They could say "the latest compliance suite"

  940. pep.

    That already looks better

  941. moparisthebest

    but then where would it link? and it might not always be true 🙂

  942. pep.

    Yes people have to keep up-to-date, it's a fact

  943. pep.

    They can change the text if it's not true anymore, or change the link to point to the newer versoin

  944. pep.

    They can change the text if it's not true anymore, or change the link to point to the newer version

  945. Dave has left

  946. pep.

    Or they can keep "2016" if they don't care about people thinking what you said above

  947. ralphm has joined

  948. Ge0rG has left

  949. ralphm has joined

  950. Ge0rG has left

  951. daniel has left

  952. daniel has joined

  953. SamWhited has joined

  954. Zash has left

  955. Ge0rG has left

  956. Kev

    Scrolling backwards a bit, I don't have a Masters. That makes me great, right?

  957. daniel has left

  958. Tobias

    No wizard hat?

  959. ralphm has joined

  960. Dave has left

  961. Dave has left

  962. Zash has joined

  963. ralphm has left

  964. Ge0rG has left

  965. ralphm has joined

  966. Kev has left

  967. daniel has left

  968. Tobias has left

  969. Tobias has joined

  970. Ge0rG has left

  971. daniel has left

  972. daniel has left

  973. Dave has left

  974. Dave has left

  975. SamWhited has left

  976. Dave has left

  977. Dave has left

  978. ralphm has joined

  979. Kev

    I had a floppy hat, which is better.

  980. Ge0rG has left

  981. pep. has joined

  982. Ge0rG has left

  983. Dave has left

  984. Dave has left

  985. ralphm has joined

  986. SamWhited has joined

  987. Ge0rG has left

  988. jere has joined

  989. ralphm has left

  990. moparisthebest has joined

  991. Ge0rG has left

  992. ralphm has joined

  993. Dave has left

  994. vanitasvitae has left

  995. SouL has joined

  996. SouL has joined

  997. Ge0rG has left

  998. Zash has left

  999. vanitasvitae has joined

  1000. Zash has joined

  1001. Ge0rG has left

  1002. genofire has joined

  1003. genofire has joined

  1004. Dave has left

  1005. Dave has left

  1006. Dave has left

  1007. Ge0rG has left

  1008. Ge0rG has left

  1009. ralphm has left

  1010. ralphm has joined

  1011. Dave has left

  1012. Dave has left

  1013. Ge0rG has left

  1014. Ge0rG has left