XMPP Council - 2018-09-19

Soon?

Sooner than yesterday in any case

Timezones, how do they work? ✏

driving and may be a tiny bit late or unrespinsive, shouldn't be too long though

!summon Dave

Perfect; I am off the road and responsive again!

Hi

It looks like we have no Kev and no Dave, so we are 3/5. Do we have an agenda volunteer?

#1 Is it Role Call or Roll Call?

We have Sam, Daniel and Georg. Kev promised to probably skip this one, if my log doesn't lie.

No wait, my log is a lie. Or rather, it's way too old.

Do we have Agenda items?

I haven't seen any new protoxeps come in

Allegedly there is stuff on the github

https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Needs+Council%22

But I didn't verify it

Yah, I have no recollection of which of these have been covered or not

Guus’ PR wasn’t

it was discussed, but Guus made updates to it

the XEP-0198 one

https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/579

(discussed and rejected back then)

(but now changes)

that one, exactly, thanks, Ge0rG

(hargh, I got disconnected from this muc again. Please disregard my last comment, if it came through)

I like the changes (I think I liked the old one as well), but it's got typos: "to" instead of "too"

guus.der.kinderen: I don't think it did, you're safe :)

I'm still in favor of that one. (I was the one who suggested it in the first place)

Yup, Daniel made me do it.

guus.der.kinderen: would you fix the "too"s?

Ge0rG: what's that? Spelling?

(yes)

so we have... #3 Items for voting: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/579 "Add handled-count-too-high specification"

+1 with the typos fixed.

Ge0rG: will fix

Huh

I switched to desktop and the messages I sent from there don't arrive...

Anyway

+1

I'm +1 as well if we're making this official; this makes good sense

Great. I suppose Kev and Dave will on-list then.

To/too fixed.

+1

daniel: there it is

Well at least sm works

https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/591 "XEP-0050 Ad-Hoc Commands: Clarify 'execute' actions equivalence" was VETOed according to the Table Of Doom, as was the competing #598. Anybody remembers what the next steps with those are?

I think we just close it and if the author wants to change things and submit a new PR that's fine. Did we have feedback? I vaguely remember that having more optional stuff didn't feel good, but don't remember the specifics

In February, Kev suggested to do a rewording of the text to make the intention clear.

Seems like we can close it to clean up the PRs with a note about that then, I'll leave something.

Oh, I was about to say "wait, there is a new protoxep, how did I miss this?" but daniel just submitted it

Sorry, looks like my desktop client got DoSed by presence.

So it's over time, we don't have a clean agenda and not much of discussion either. Wrap it up and aim for +1W?

yes

Our work here is done.

guus.der.kinderen, you still have a s/to/too/ to do, here: “by sending an 'h' value that is to high”

Also, is is “a undefined-condition” or “an undefined-condition”?

Also s/handled-count-to-high/handled-count-too-high/

Link Mauve: can you edit the pr? I'm not near my laptop for the rest of the day.

Oh wow, I indeed can! :o

Never saw that.

Their online editor fails the search feature though. ^^'

There, done.

Tx