XMPP Council - 2019-05-15


  1. dwd

    BTW, I'm assuming nothing for the agenda this afternoon, still. Hence no agenda, which is simple laziness on my part. Link Mauve, please check your outstanding votes.

  2. Kev

    Given no agenda, I might well be absent.

  3. dwd

    OK. Ge0rG is absent too, I believe. jonas’ Link Mauve, if either of you can't make it we'll declare a skip.

  4. Ge0rG

    I might be less absent than anticipated.

  5. jonas’

    I’ll be here, but possibly a few minutes late

  6. jonas’

    I got caught up in a work meeting and can only start my commute home now

  7. jonas’

    .

  8. dwd

    Tick tick.

  9. dwd

    1) Who's Here?

  10. dwd

    I mean, apart from me.

  11. Link Mauve

    Oh hi, just on time!

  12. Link Mauve

    Right, votes.

  13. dwd

    That's... Two.

  14. jonas’

    I’m here

  15. jonas’

    just fell into the door

  16. jonas’

    just fell through the door into the flat

  17. dwd

    Are you OK?

  18. jonas’

    eh, }s

  19. jonas’

    eh, yes

  20. dwd

    Anyway, that's Three. So we have quorum.

  21. dwd

    2) Agenda Bashing

  22. jonas’

    (it’s a figure of speech (which apparently does not translate well) for when you come home exhausted)

  23. dwd

    Despite some effort, there was nothing for the agenda, so I didn't bother writing that in an email.

  24. dwd

    jonas’, I understood, I was merely being obtuse, sorry.

  25. jonas’

    I’m afraid I’m too exhausted for that ;)

  26. jonas’

    Editor Hat: I’m sorry that I didn’t get around to push updates to xeps, I had like four minutes between coming home and meeting start ;)

  27. jonas’

    will take care of that after the meeting

  28. dwd

    Did I miss anything for the agenda?

  29. dwd

    Or do we really have nothing?

  30. dwd

    OK, I'll assume nothing.

  31. dwd

    3) Items for a vote (NULL)

  32. dwd

    4) Outstanding Votes

  33. dwd

    I think it's just Link Mauve for one.

  34. dwd

    PR #758 - XEP-0060: Expose pubsub#access_model and pubsub#publish_model - https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/758

  35. jonas’

    I think so too, but will double check wtih tedds mail to be sure

  36. dwd

    Link Mauve, ^^

  37. Link Mauve

    (I’m looking at it.)

  38. dwd

    5) AOB

  39. dwd

    ?

  40. Link Mauve

    Didn’t we already vote on that?

  41. Link Mauve

    I quite remember having said +1 to it, or did something change that required a re-vote?

  42. dwd

    Well, you're welcome to say "+1" again for the avoidance of doubt.

  43. Link Mauve

    I’m +1 on it anyway. ^^

  44. dwd

    I think we re-voted.

  45. dwd

    OK.

  46. dwd

    Any OB?

  47. dwd

    Assuming not:

  48. Link Mauve

    Still deploring the lack of specification for the various form values in this XEP and a few other ones.

  49. Link Mauve

    None from me.

  50. jonas’

    none from me

  51. dwd

    OK

  52. dwd

    6) Next Meeting

  53. dwd

    +1W?

  54. jonas’

    wfm

  55. dwd

    That's 2019-05-22 15:00Z I believe.

  56. dwd

    7) Ite, Meeting Est

  57. dwd

    Thanks all.

  58. dwd

    jonas’, Looks like you have a load of Editor work now, sorry.

  59. pep.

    Link Mauve, I think 758 was first vetoed and then it was brought back to life a few weeks after

  60. jonas’

    that’s alright

  61. jonas’

    will see to it in half an hour or so

  62. Link Mauve

    pep., oh, thanks.

  63. dwd

    Link Mauve, Yeah, I think Kev originally vetoed, and somebody changed his mind several weeks afterward.

  64. pep.

    Does that not keep the original votes in this case? As in "I'm coming back on my decision" rather than "it's a new decision", it's not like 0060 has advanced or anything had changed with regard to it (or what judges would say "new evidence has come to light")

  65. jonas’

    dwd, thanks for annotating the PRs

  66. dwd

    (Some of)

  67. jonas’

    dwd, for the next agenda: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/690#issuecomment-463793958

  68. Ge0rG

    Oops. Sorry, looks like I missed the meeting.

  69. jonas’

    uh

  70. jonas’

    I can see a conflict arising

  71. jonas’

    https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/779 has passed the council vote, but the text there is not 100% compatible with the text proposed on the ML

  72. jonas’

    https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/779 has passed the council vote, but the text there is not 100% compatible with the text proposed by Ge0rG on the ML for a proper fix

  73. jonas’

    oh, it is

  74. jonas’

    nevermind

  75. Ge0rG

    jonas’: that #690 comment is three months old, unless github is in another time bubble, right?

  76. jonas’

    Ge0rG, yes, but we still haven’t talked about it

  77. jonas’

    note that the PR is even from last council

  78. jonas’

    dwd, also for next agenda: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/778 -- we need to re-discuss it after the changes Ge0rG made, it was vetoed by Kev before

  79. dwd

    Ge0rG, No worries about missing a null meeting.

  80. Ge0rG

    jonas’: 778 has been voted on twice, the last vote was with the new changes.

  81. jonas’

    are you sure?

  82. jonas’

    ah I’m too stupid to read

  83. jonas’

    yeah

  84. jonas’

    passed \o/

  85. jonas’

    I’m starting to question whether I should really be messing with xsf/xeps right now

  86. jonas’

    mmmmmergespree