KevHopefully the last week of silliness, but I'm probably going to be unavailable at Council time again.
Ge0rGI'm there today, and I'm very sorry for missing the last ones.
dwdAfternoon all - I'm having a catastrophic day, so I'd be very grateful if we could skip this week.
Ge0rGLooks like we are missing two already.
jonas’I think we should get the vote on '412 started to stop people from flaming to the list
Ge0rGI'd absolutely love to have a formal vote on 0412
Ge0rGeven if it's the only agenda item and everybody is on-list
Ge0rGI'm willing to chair through such a mini-agenda.
jonas’I’d be very ok with that
dwdDo you have a Link Mauve?
jonas’he was around in another MUC a minute ago
Link MauveI am here yes.
Ge0rGThere is also ATT in the inbox.
dwdLink Mauve, Opinion?
jonas’so we have 3/5 and we could get the vote on '412 and that protoxep started
jonas’with my editor hat on, I’d like to get the protoxep started, too, because it was lingering in the inbox for quite a while
Link MauveSounds sensible.
dwdIf you guys want to vote on those two, I can go along with that.
Ge0rGdwd: would you like somebody else (me?) to chair that?
dwdGe0rG, I'll take you up on that, it means I can pay less attention, and I confess my mind is on other things today.
Ge0rG1) Alright. Welcome everybody, roll call!
dwdhere (but distracted)
Ge0rGKev sent apologies. Link Mauve?
jonas’3.5/5, let’s roll
Ge0rG2) Agenda Bashing. I've got XEP-0412 for Draft and ATT from inbox
jonas’there is a needs council PR open
Ge0rGThanks go to Tedd Sterr, the shoe fixing elf.
Ge0rGI'm on a data capped connection, so I'll let that load in the background for now.
jonas’> XEP-0308: Clarify correcting a message multiple times
Link MauveUgh, that’ll break existing clients which correct based on the previous id.
Ge0rG3a) Item for Vote: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0412.html for Draft
jonas’Link Mauve, rightfully so!!!
jonas’I’m +1 on 3a
Link MauveGe0rG, +1 for me, your changes are good and we really should move on with that one.
Ge0rGAlright, let's assume dwd being distracted and on-list and move on.
Ge0rG3b) Proposal of https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/automatic-trust-transfer.html
Link MauveOn list.
dwdMea culpa. I am on-list, but I did wonder if we should consider a last call once more given the change of author?
dwd(that of 412)
dwdI'm on-list for ATT as well.
Ge0rGdwd: what would be your rationale for that? I can see an LC regarding my content changes, but I'd rather revert those and vote on Draft now, with a later changes-related Council vote then.
Ge0rGOn list for ATT.
Ge0rG3c) https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/764 "XEP-0308: Clarify correcting a message multiple times"
dwdGe0rG, Mostly in the hope we'd hear at least some useful comments from the standards list, I admit.
jonas’I’m +1 on 3c
dwdon-list for 3c.
jonas’it is, in my opinion, the obvious reading of the XEP. I know that others have other obvious readings, but should definitely pick one official obvious reading
Ge0rG-1. The XEP is in dire need of clarification, but the PR does a change into the wrong direction. It's more logical to correct the _last_ message and not the _first_ one, e.g. when fetching partial MUC history.
Link MauveI’m ±0 on 3c, it will break clients, but the other way will probably break the other set of clients anyway although it seems more logical to me.
Link MauveGe0rG, right.
Ge0rGI need some damn good rationale (better than in the XEP change block) to get me convinced.
Ge0rG4) Outstanding Votes
Ge0rGProposed XMPP Extension: E2E Authentication in XMPP: Certificate Issuance and Revocation - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/eax-cir.html
Ge0rGis expiring today. Not sure if there are still open votes on that
Ge0rGProposed XMPP Extension: DNS Queries over XMPP (DoX) - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/dox.html as well
jonas’I’m still on list :/
jonas’Link Mauve, do you have an opinion on eax-cir?
Link Mauve4a I’m still on list too. :x
moparisthebestiirc DoX is only missing a vote from Kev and passes unless he -1's it
jonas’+1 to eax-cir
Ge0rGdid jonas’ change to -0 on DoX?
Ge0rGlooks like eax-cir is going to pass with a slight minority then as well.
Ge0rG5) Next Meeting
Ge0rG+1W sounds like it works for Kev as well
Ge0rGWell. Let's just try it and see what happens.
Link MauveYes, I have an AOB for the editors, there are a few linging PRs still marked as Needs Council while our votes are expired, such as https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/747
Link MauvePlease do the needful. :)
Ge0rGLooks like the active subset of our editors just vanished. Let's hope they read the Minutes.
Ge0rGIt also never hurts to mention that there is always one more place for volunteer editors.
Link Mauvemathieui, IIRC you were interested.
Ge0rGlooks like we are done here.
Ge0rG7) Incomprehensible Latin Words
dwd"Ite, Meeting Est". A paraphrase of the latin Catholic order of service, which is a phrase in such arcane Latin that nobody actually knows its literal meaning.
dwdAlso, thanks Ge0rG.
moparisthebestso... who do I have to bribe to publish DoX on monday morning...
Ge0rGmoparisthebest: we are looking for volunteer editors!
SouLYou could bribe yourself, how cool is that
Ge0rGmoparisthebest: apply today, get approved tomorrow in Board.
SouLWe made a call for editors not long ago
Ge0rGand hope that iteam will give you the required permissions until then.
pep."Ge0rG> -1. The XEP is in dire need of clarification, but the PR does a change into the wrong direction. It's more logical to correct the _last_ message and not the _first_ one, e.g. when fetching partial MUC history.", I also think it should be the other way, but tbh I don't mind as long as it's clear. What guarantees do we have that the other way it not going to be vetoed either? :(
jonas’FWIW, I won’t veto it, that’d be silly, I don’t even maintain an implementation.
Link MauveI wouldn’t veto it either, but it indeed would be much better to get a good rationale for the change, either way it goes.
jonas’pep., I also think that council is better than getting in a change-veto-loop
pep.As it was mentioned here, I'd like to see more documentation for what I can do without any rights for the editors. I am soon going to have a bit more time and I hope I can help with that. If it's "you need powers" I'm also happy to be knighted if necessary, assuming I know the things to do
jonas’"without any rights" not much
jonas’with github powers you can already do a lot
jonas’which I also outlined in my mail to members@
pep.jonas’, ok so I need to be knighted in any case if I want in right