-
4
yellow vest revolutionary council : š¦ š¼
-
4
join the revolution : giletsjaunes@muc.jeproteste.info š” šāāļø š©āš©āš§āš¦ ā š§”
-
moparisthebest
Aw man did they raise xsf membership tax
-
jonasā
theheck?
-
guus.der.kinderen
> Aw man did they raise xsf membership tax š¤£
-
guus.der.kinderen
Also, that avatar had a green shirt.
-
Ge0rG
Is it that time of the week again?
-
jonasā
it is!
-
jonasā
well, in 8 minutes
-
Link Mauve
And this time Iām here! Sorry again for last week.
-
Ge0rG
Link Mauve: you better have some beverages with you this time
-
Link Mauve
I have tea besides me, like always.
- jonasā imagines Link Mauve with a cup of tea while protesting
-
jonasā
thatās too british for you
-
jonasā
I think?
-
Zash
Spent too long on that island?
-
Link Mauve
I had rooibos in my thermos last Saturday. ^^
-
Link Mauve
In addition to a bottle of water, pretty much mandatory.
-
jonasā
I bet that thermos is classified as weaponry.
-
jonasā
because hard and such
-
Link Mauve
Damn, if I canāt import British customs anymore⦠Down with the Queen^Wpresident!
-
Ge0rG
you May have some problems.
-
jonasā
oh my god.
-
Kev
'tis time.
-
jonasā
'tis time.
-
Kev
And we seem at first glance to not have a chair.
- Kev pokes Dave.
-
Ge0rG
Does the XSF have a furniture budget?
-
dwd
Afternoon.
-
jonasā
woo
-
dwd
Sorry, just dashed back from an external meeting across the city.
-
Ge0rG
Kev: your magic worked!
-
dwd
So:
-
dwd
1) Roll Call:
- jonasā
-
Link Mauve
/me✎ - Link Mauve
- Ge0rG
-
dwd
XEP-0245
-
Kev
I is still here, naturally.
-
dwd
Full House!
-
dwd
2) Items for a vote:
-
jonasā
(not sure if dwd is waiting for suggestions or searching in his documents)
-
jonasā
(we did have a ProtoXEP submission at least)
-
dwd
a) Proposed XMPP Extension: Simple Buttons Inbox
-
dwd
https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/buttons.html
-
dwd
(Searching and fighting with a MacBook. Awful things)
-
jonasā
soo... Iām not happy with the things quality editor wise
-
dwd
Tempting to veto this until the examples are funnier.
-
dwd
jonasā, How so?
-
jonasā
e.g. the "OPTIONAL." thing which is left over below the Glossary heading
-
jonasā
section 9 is questionable too
-
jonasā
and such
-
jonasā
but Iām not here with my editorās hat
-
Ge0rG
Do we have other comparable XEPs in place?
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, in terms of functionality or in terms of editorial quality?
-
Kev
We have accepted very raw XEPs in the past, if that's the question.
-
Ge0rG
in terms of functionality.
-
dwd
We've had a number of early Experimental XEPs in similar condition over the years, I think.
-
Kev
Often mine. Although I'm not sure I've gone quite this far.
-
Link Mauve
Ge0rG, we do have 0050, itās mentioned already.
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, not that I know. the closest is data forms and ad-hoc, but they donāt do quite the same thing.
-
Ge0rG
I wonder if embedding a data form into a message would make sense instead.
-
Kev
They do so dangerously close to the same thing that a new mechanism seems wrong to me.
-
Zash
There's precedent for dataforms in messages in eg 0045
-
jonasā
Kev, which?
-
Kev
(xep4 in messages)
-
jonasā
indeed, kind of
-
Zash
I did a draft of that but it was ugly and horrifying and let's not go that way
-
dwd
Do we have buttons in dataforms?
-
Ge0rG
I kind of fear data-forms indeed.
-
Kev
I appreciate forms don't quite do buttons yet, but extending them for that and i18n seems more appropriate at first glance than a new mechanism that we'll later need to extend for other form things.
-
jonasā
dwd, no, but they could be handled with a list-single
-
Zash
dwd: not really
-
Link Mauve
dwd, we have list-single, which is close enough.
-
Ge0rG
aren't actions akin to buttons?
-
Link Mauve
It already is represented by buttons in some clients when there are few choices.
-
Zash
Ge0rG: those are fixed at next/prev/cancel/complete
-
dwd
Well, maybe - but with ad-hoc we did actions, as Ge0rG implies, not in dataforms.
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, theyāre a Ad-Hoc thing, not a Data Forms thing
-
Zash
dataforms in message: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#example-79
-
jonasā
vanilla Ad-Hoc does not allow passing the context of the conversation in which this is happening
-
jonasā
which this ProtoXEP does
-
jonasā
and which any solution which wants to have this needs to
-
Ge0rG
jonasā: I don't see context in this protoXEP
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, @from
-
jonasā
you can distinguish whether a reply from a user comes via a MUC or not
-
dwd
Ge0rG, There's context of conversation, not of message.
-
jonasā
although that would probably work via MUC IQs, but maybe letās not go there either
-
jonasā
having context of the message is also a possibility with the protoxep by making the values unique
-
Zash
Combine with <thread> or whatever?
-
jonasā
(e.g. append the @id of the message)
-
dwd
So two questions:
-
Link Mauve
If two people send a <button/> in two following messages with the same @value, you have no way of knowing which one was referenced.
-
dwd
i) Do we think that having buttons in chat messages is OK?
-
jonasā
Link Mauve, thatās true for a MUC.
-
dwd
ii) Is this method so broken we should abandon it?
-
jonasā
i) yes, I do think that.
-
Ge0rG
+1 to (i), not sure about (ii)
-
jonasā
I do think that we should have that in fact, because there are many good and reasonable use-cases for this. Memberbot being one of them.
-
Link Mauve
jonasā, for direct chats too, if your contact sends you the same set of buttons twice.
-
Kev
i) I think some use case involving something like this is valid (not quite answering the question)
-
jonasā
Link Mauve, thatās your contactās fault.
-
Link Mauve
dwd, i) definitely.
-
dwd
jonasā, memberbot gets around the lack by using xmpp URIs to click on, which is pretty ikky.
-
jonasā
dwd, I agree.
-
Kev
ii) It doesn't seem to be actively broken, but that's not the only reason to consider rejecting, I think.
-
Ge0rG
maybe a client should only render the buttons in the last incoming message?
-
dwd
Ge0rG, Or grey them out when clicked.
-
jonasā
do we wanrt to open the can of worms what the "last message" is again? :)
-
Zash
I'd like a generic <in-reply-to id=.../> plz
-
jonasā
Zash, SHIM?
-
Link Mauve
ii) Iāve needed way more than ājust a set of buttonsā a few times, for instance this very poll youāre making could do with a two questions text-single form.
-
Kev
I'm of the opinion that this is the Wrong Way, in the absense of further persuasion.
-
Link Mauve
So, not sure itās that broken, but it looks very much not usable for more than a very narrow set of usecases.
-
Kev
I just can't quite decide whether I should veto or not.
-
dwd
OK, so can I have some votes please:
-
jonasā
regarding (ii): - I think those types of features are only useful for bots. - I think this proposal is something to play with. - I also definitely want more extensive features than this.
-
Kev
On-list.
-
jonasā
I think Iām with Kev, but itās tricky.
-
dwd
I think I'm +0 on this.
-
Ge0rG
On-list as well, for similar reasons
-
jonasā
formal question: can I say -1 now and decide to change it to +0 or +1 later on, until everyone has voted or the vote expires?
-
Kev
I'm concerned that people will jump on this, implement the simple stuff, and then immediately start extending with other form fields, and we'll rebuild xep4.
-
jonasā
Kev, very valid convern✎ -
dwd
jonasā, We have, historically, allowed changes to votes until the last vote comes in, yes.
-
jonasā
Kev, very valid concern. ✏
-
Kev
jonasā: I see nothing wrong with 'on-list, -1 if I don't do so'.
-
jonasā
ok.
-
Link Mauve
On list.
-
dwd
jonasā, Also, what Kev says.
-
jonasā
on-list, -1 if I donāt do that.
-
Kev
(But if you do end up with -1, you're obliged to provide reasons)
-
dwd
jonasā, Though please do vote even if it's to confirm a veto, since otherwise you're delaying the end of the vote.
-
jonasā
ok
-
jonasā
also, good point Kev.
-
jonasā
so changing to pure on-list now, because I canāt give a clear reason for -1 on the spot
-
Kev
You don't have to on the spot, on standards@ is appropriate.
-
jonasā
Kev, if I say "-1 if I donāt go on-list", I kinda have to though :)
-
Ge0rG
would this protoxep be sufficient for the "interact with a bot" use case?
-
dwd
Out of curiosity, of those on-list, are any of you potentially going to vote +1, or is this a choice between -1 and ±0?
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, not for the use-cases I have in mind.
-
Kev
This is a choice between -1 and -0.
-
jonasā
dwd, there is a slim chance of +1
-
Ge0rG
there is a moderate chance of +1
-
dwd
I ask because unless we can find three +1's, there's very little point in continuing.
-
jonasā
my issue with data forms is still that they donāt have a i18n story, and while others seem to think that you can always discover the right language, I donāt think thatās true.
-
Ge0rG
I like the simplicity of the proposal, and it might be a good self-contained things not bothered by dataforms
-
jonasā
so on this ground alone, I thnik that this proposal has a material advantage over plain data forms.
-
dwd
jonasā, I'm afraid that i18n in more a theory than a practise anyway.
-
jonasā
dwd, I know of implementations which send i18nād error messages, and implementations which can deal with that to some extent.
-
Kev
jonasā: I think we're faced with two options - one is to 'fix' xep4 in whatever way, the other is to invent an entirely new xep4. Given xep4's ubiquity, I'm far more inclined to fix that (until it's shown it can't be fixed).
-
jonasā
Kev, I agree.
-
jonasā
although I think that XEP-0004 in itself does too many things already.
-
jonasā
(I donāt like the mix of forms and reports under the same element, it makes implementations weird and validation more complex than necessary.)
-
dwd
Kev, The other alternative is a sort of mutation of XEP-0050 for chat.
-
Kev
dwd: Essentially extending xep4, I think, so I'd put that under the same heading.
-
Zash
'submit' type form field?
-
Zash
Like <input type=submit> in html?
-
jonasā
just a list-single with a specific var would do, no?
-
dwd
Anyway, you're all on-list, so let's move on.
-
dwd
Although what to, I'm not so sure - do we have anything else to vote on?
-
Kev
https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/cs-2019.html ?
-
jonasā
did previous council close the votes on #716, #715? sorry, I donāt have that in my mental cache at the moment and theyāre still open on github
-
jonasā
oh, yeah, and that
-
dwd
Yes, just getting to that.
-
jonasā
(for future reference: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/716 https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/715 )
-
dwd
b) Proposed XMPP Extension: XMPP Compliance Suites 2019
-
dwd
https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/cs-2019.html
-
jonasā
+1, but Iād like a discussion on why the CS are on the Standards Track and not Informational. It doesnāt make sense to me, semantically, except that XEP-0001 specifically lists CS to be on Standards Track.
-
Link Mauve
+1, even though there are a few new XEPs missing from it which would be useful in 2019, but that can be fixed.
-
dwd
I'm +1 on this.
-
Ge0rG
+1 for moving to experimental
-
Kev
I only caught this just before Council, so I need to on-list.
-
Kev
Sorry.
-
Ge0rG
jonasā: what's the delta to CS'18?
-
dwd
jonasā, Adding a delta to the document would be handy, actually.
-
Ge0rG
(I think it would make sense to mention new / removed XEPs in the Revision History)
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, that would make sense if it was the same document
-
Kev
It would anyway, I think.
-
jonasā
one sec for the "diff"
-
Kev
Not here necessarily, in the XEP itself.
-
Ge0rG
jonasā: IMHO, it would make sense to keep the whole history of CS in the newest one.
-
Link Mauve
As per my email from last meeting, Iād like to make a lot more noise about compliance suites, calling it XMPPĀ 2019 and doing a lot of marketing around this, pointing fingers to Pidgin and other abandonned clients.
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, thatās awful
-
jonasā
Link Mauve, maybe sync up with Tedd Sterr on this
-
Ge0rG
yaxim is abandoned by that definition š¢
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, ok, the diff is unreadable even for me, so Iād like to do that in a quiet minute
-
dwd
Link Mauve, It's something to be pushed up to the Board,m actually.
-
Link Mauve
Ge0rG, the goal is to stop with the complaint that XMPP is bad because Pidgin is bad.
-
Link Mauve
dwd, indeed.
-
Ge0rG
jonasā: at the minimum I'd like to see what changed since the last CS in the revision history
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, can do, but not right now
-
Ge0rG
Link Mauve: I know, but as long as Pidgin is advertised by the XSF, this is moot (https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/715)✎ -
Zash
Is "XMPP is bad because Pidgin is bad" solvable by redefining "XMPP"? I suspect we need to crowd-fund maintanence and development of it to fix that. :|✎ -
Ge0rG
Link Mauve: I know, but as long as Pidgin is advertised by the XSF, this is moot (https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html) ✏
-
Zash
Is "XMPP is bad because Pidgin is bad" solvable by redefining "XMPP"? I suspect we need to crowd-fund maintanence and development of Pidgin to fix that. :| ✏
-
jonasā
bump the stream header version
-
Link Mauve
Ge0rG, no, we can change things even if we donāt fix all of them at once.
-
Ge0rG
XMPP2 for president!
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, so youāre -1 until the revision history is fixed?
-
Zash
jonasā: YES! Kill the jabber:client & jabber:server namespaces and unify! :D
-
jonasā
oh no, you gave your +1 already :)
-
Ge0rG
jonasā: I'm +1
-
jonasā
Zash, sounds like a plan!
-
Link Mauve
And the announce effect is already something to aim for, for ācompliance suitesā or whichever new name weād find.
-
Link Mauve
(I like Rustās āeditionsā.)
-
jonasā
dwd, I think everyone gave a vote or on-listād?
-
Ge0rG
Link Mauve: we can only change things if all of us are heading in the same direction.
-
Kev
I would very much like to see a logical diff from the previous suite, but that won't be influencing my vote (on-list).
-
dwd
Folks, what the Board chooses to do with the website and the compliance suites once we finish them is out of scope for this meeting.
-
jonasā
(FWIW, Iād also like input from the xmpp-based social network crowd; they could probably use their own section in the CS)
-
Ge0rG
regarding contents, I think that 0184 belongs to IM Core
-
Link Mauve
Iād like cs-2019 not to supersede cs-2018 until it is set active, but other than that +1.
-
dwd
Link Mauve, I think that's automatically the case.
-
jonasā
Ge0rG, can you put this on-list or somewhere less ephemeral than this room, please?
-
Link Mauve
dwd, it currently is set to supersede it, even though itāll be experimental for a while.
-
Link Mauve
But thatās editorās domain.
-
dwd
Link Mauve, Yes, but it's an intent until it's Active, I believe.
-
jonasā
it will never be Active
-
jonasā
because itās Standards Track
-
jonasā
it can only become Draft or Final (on the positive side of things)✎ -
jonasā
it can only become Draft and Final (on the positive side of things) ✏
-
dwd
ANything else?
-
dwd
(To vote on?)
-
jonasā
the PRs I mentioned above
-
dwd
jonasā, I'll check the status of those PRs later. I cannot recall their status either.
-
jonasā
ok
-
jonasā
fine with me
-
dwd
3) AOB
-
jonasā
just a quick note that we have had a XEP-0001 modification
-
Ge0rG
IIRC we voted on both PRs.
-
Link Mauve
jonasā, the last council said they didnāt have any pending vote.
-
jonasā
we can now move Proposed back to Experimental
-
jonasā
and also that we have a bunch of stuff stuck in Last Call
-
jonasā
so that would be something to look on for the next meeting
-
Kev
I thought everything got voted on last Council.
-
dwd
KevI think so too.
-
jonasā
ok, then itās probably my (editorās) own oversight
-
Kev
At least, everything I knew needed to be.
-
jonasā
For reference, those are the open LCs: XEP-0357 (Push Notifications), LC ends: 2018-11-03; https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0357.html XEP-0359 (Unique and Stable Stanza IDs), LC ends: 2018-11-03; https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0359.html XEP-0280 (Message Carbons), LC ends: 2018-02-22; https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0280.html XEP-0363 (HTTP File Upload), LC ends: 2018-06-18; https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0363.html
-
jonasā
since theyāre open, Iāll re-start them due to council switch as editor soon-ish
-
jonasā
just so that you get an idea already.
-
Kev
At least 357 and 359 aren't open, we definitely finished those last Council.
-
jonasā
(after double-checking that they havent been voted on already)
-
dwd
jonasā, I believe that XEP-0363 is awaiting edits due to feedback, but I might be wrong.
-
Ge0rG
I'm pretty sure we also -1ed Carbons because of XMPP-NG
-
jonasā
hm
-
jonasā
ok, Iāll shut up now and do my due diligence as editor. sorry for the noise. :)
-
dwd
Any Other AOB?
-
jonasā
not from me
-
dwd
4) Next Meeting
-
jonasā
+1w WFM
-
dwd
Same XMPP Time, Same XMPP Channel?
-
Link Mauve
WFM.
-
dwd
That's 2018-12-19 16:00 UTC.
-
Kev
I will try to be here. I'll be in another meeting at the same time.
-
Kev
So preemptive tentative apologies.
-
dwd
I'll be (finally!) back at home.
-
Link Mauve
Kev, would another time suit you better?
-
Kev
Not a lot.
-
Ge0rG
I'll be on a train most probably.
-
Kev
It's only next week and last week it's an issue.
-
Ge0rG
Unless, due to strike, I'll be on a car. Which will make typing much more challenging.
-
jonasā
I can do any day of the week except friday and weekend next week at that time, FWIW
-
dwd
Let's stick with the same time and hope Kev/Georg can make it. We hit Christmas after that anyway.
-
Link Mauve
Yup, at which point we can do the meeting at 35c3. :D
-
jonasā
(not for me)
-
dwd
5) Ite, Meeting Est.
-
dwd
Thanks all.
-
Kev
Thanks all.
-
jonasā
thanks all
-
Ge0rG
Thanks!
-
Link Mauve
Thanks. :)
-
Ge0rG
Oh, I'd also like to advance XEP-0410.
-
Link Mauve
Ge0rG, shouldnāt you do that on standards@?
-
Ge0rG
probably yes
-
jonasā
you wanna have a Call For Experience issued?
-
Ge0rG
I think I do. We have working implementations in poezio and in yaxim, and the server optimization in ejabberd and prosody