Dave1) Roll Call [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll_Call_(Hank_Mobley_album)]
DaveDo we have Ge0rG and SamWhited ?
SamWhitedoops, yup, sorry
jonasw(last messgae I have from georg is around :59, so I guess he’ll be right back)
DaveOK, we'll hope Ge0rG joins us later.
Dave2) Isn't it nice that Tedd Sterr does the minutes?
jonaswI like his minutes :)
DaveIt *is*, but he is starting to complain about this section.
Dave3) Proposed XMPP Extension: OMEMO Media sharing
Title: OMEMO Media sharing
An informal way of sharing media files despite limitations in the
DaveAnyone any opinions on this one?
daniel+1. but i know it might be controversial so no hard feelings if other people are -1 on that :-)
SamWhitedI don't love the way Conversations shares encrypted files, but I'm not against standardizing it either. I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to send the files in an encrypted ZIP archive or something though.
SamWhitedThat way they can still be opened even if your client doesn't support them, and ZIP is well standardized (or some similar format if there are others that are widely supported)
danielnote it's not exactly standarizing just 'informational'
jonaswisn’t zip encryption horribly broken?
SamWhitedIt might be
DaveThat's good. So I'm concerned with inventing a new URI scheme, and also including a thumbnail in the same field. I get that this is Informational, but that usually describe "Best Practices", and this doesn't strike me as one.
KevI think making this Informational seems wrong (less wrong than standards-track, but still).
KevI could see the argument for historical (in its more recent meaning, rather than the formal one).
DaveKev, You have a view on this?
SamWhitedZIP specifically supports an AES mechanism that's apparently not broken (according to one random site on the internet), but really that was just an example because I knew Windows could open it. There may be some other standard format that's better.
KevBut I wouldn't even be fond of historical.
KevSorry, I think muc.xmpp.org just froze for a few minutes.
DaveAh, that was weird.
DaveOK. Votes, then?
DaveI'm -1 - I think if we had this now we'd be trying to deprecate it.
Dave4) Proposed XMPP Extension: Ephemeral Messages
Title: Ephemeral Messages
This specification defines a protocol to send ephemeral messages over
XMPP and synchronize timer value setting across devices.
DaveLet it flow, let it flow! Oh, let those stanzas flow...
DaveAh, better. It seems frozen again, hence the song...
KevI'm not entirely sure I even understand this one.
danielas someone who has implement burner messages a couple of times I don’t think this is how it should be done at all
DaveI understand it (well, mostly), but I don't see how one can do ephemeral messages in an open environment with any kind of reliability.
KevI think the argument on-list was that it was advisory.
SamWhitedYah this didn't seem great to me. Sounds like we're all more or less in agreement here.
KevAnd you can do advisory ephemeral messages in an open environment.
DaveWell, yes. But I have no idea how you communicate the advisory nature to your user.
danielbut for something that is 'advisory' there is way too much weird stuff going on in the xep. if you want to achieve the advisory effect just add a <please-burn-after seconds="5"/> to the message and be done with it
KevOr deal with the UX of your messages all vanishing at different times from your local archive.
KevLua is pegging the CPU.
DaveRight - votes, anyone?
danielthat's how i usually implement it
danieland not everyone running xmpp is in an open enviroment
Davedaniel, Well, that's certainly true.
DaveBut yeah, NTP-over-XMPP is enough for me to -1 this one.
danieli offered a while ago to write down what i usually use but nobody really wanted me to
KevI don't think this *is* NTP over XMPP.
KevIt's trying to synchronise agreement on the age of messages before they expire, I *think*.
Dave4a) XEP-0045: Add a feature for the voice request flow #653
danielbut offer still stands if people find it useful
danielok never mind. +1
danieland meh lag
Kevdaniel: I'm almost inclined, although I have no interest in it myself at the moment, to say it'd be worthwhile to head off other people doing it in stranger ways.
DaveSo this wasn't on the agenda (sorry!), but I figured I'd raise it and if people want to vote on list I'll totally understand.
KevI think the PR should really mention that although it's normatively should now, it wasn't in the past - but equally that voice requests are so rarely (if ever) implemented that we're probably not going to see much fallout from adding as-is.
KevThat said, it probably is not hard to just add "this feature advertisement wasn't present in earlier versions of the specification, so servers might implement voice requests and not advertise it".
Dave+1 on this PR. Looks straightforward, though if the caveat Kev mentions were added I'd be even happier.
SamWhitedI don't love adding more things for a feature that is rarely used and slowly growing 0045 even more, but I'm not sure that I'd block either.
KevI'm also not sure what it achieves, other than being certain that a voice request is supported - as you have no way of knowing that it's not supported.
DaveOK - votes?
Ge0rGI'm very sorry, I just had somebody at the door
KevSo I'm +0 on this. I don't see how it's actually helping anything, but won't block it.
SamWhitedI'm on list I suppose. I keep going back and forth between "it doesn't matter" and "we need to stop adding cruft"
danielGe0rG, pizza or the police?
DaveOK (And welcome Ge0rG).
Davedaniel, Could be both.
Ge0rGOMEMO Media sharing --> on-list
Ephemeral Messages --> I've had a look at it and I don't like it, but I have no constructive ideas how to make ephemeral messages work better. on-list
4a #653 --> +1
Dave5) Outstanding Votes
jonaswSamWhited: I don't see how a feature var is cruft, tbh. Without it, the existing feature spec is pretty useless.
DaveSo I haven't updated the Spreadsheet of Doom, which I'll do after this, so I don't actually know what's outstanding.
Ge0rGI've heard that I missed a vote on IM-NG and nobody noticed.
DaveBut if you know you're outstanding, please... instand? ... yourself.