XMPP Council - 2019-07-17

Hi all - looks like I'm very likely to miss this afternoon's meeting, and helpfully, I've been too busy to get an agenda out.

I've had some topic for discussion that I wanted to bring up, but I forgot what it was

If we are out of Dave and out of Kev, I can try to chair today.

There's two new protoxeps, reactions and occupant-id, I guess that can be put on the agenda, or at least to review by council

pep.: do you have links?

I feel a bit rushed TBH, putting new proto-XEPs up for in-meeting review, without having them on the agenda yesterday

Editor merged them two days ago, but maybe forgot to send the emails.

No, the emails have been sent too.

So you've just discovered that I didn't read my emails. Shame on me.

https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/occupant-id.html

https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/reactions.html

Ge0rG, ^

👍

as both are already two days old, I presume that every Council member has seen and read them and they can be voted on.

at least on one I have a strong opinion

I have strong opinions on both.

tis time

I’m here

Fake-Dev is up to no good, again.

1) Roll Call

Link Mauve?

looks like Kev is out and Dave sent very-likely-apologies.

jonas’: just you and me don't make a quorum.

Hi.

I’m here.

ohai Link Mauve

Shall we commence with a Council Meeting, then?

Sure.

We have quorum.

2) Agenda Bashing

For a lack of in-advance agenda, we have two proto-XEPs that were passed in.

Any other things to put on?

not from me

None from me either.

Awesome. Let's begin, then

3) Items for voting:

3a) XEP-xxxx: Anonymous unique occupant identifiers for MUCs https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/occupant-id.html

+1 on that one from me

+1 too.

I'd rather see those occupant IDs be in the form of JIDs and maybe even be passed as @jid in the 0045 <item/>.

But +1

3b) Message Reactions https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/reactions.html

I'm a bit torn on this. It's got some implementation details that I'd love to straighten out, but the elephant in the room is XEP-0372: References

Ge0rG, the reasoning for putting them in messages was to be able to track them during MAM retrieval.

This is obviously duplicating a subset of References.

Link Mauve: yeah, it's a useful thing to have

I reasoned why references isn’t a good basis for reactions in https://github.com/jabbercat/jabbercat/issues/80

> References: refers to the body and may apply to only a subset of the referencing message. This is not so great: it creates ambiguity because the whole message is in fact a reaction.

jonas’: that is probably the easiest to sort out with reactions

as was discussed on list (or was it in xsf@?), we need some way to tell a MAM server that certain messages belong together.

and it should be a unified way and not defined in each XEP individually

jonas’, it was proposed to add a schema for referencing full messages, but IIRC that was only in the context of MIX, I don’t remember the details for the rest.

one of the ugly sub-problems is "which ID to reference?"

anyway, I'm still undecided on that, so +0 for now

4) Outstanding Votes

some have expired last week.

3) I’m +1 on it, these issues can be ironed out before going to draft.

Dave and Kev are pending on last week's

ohwait.

jonas’: your vote on 3b please

oh sorry

I’m +1

the details can be ironed out

5) Next Meeting

I suggest trying +1W

+1W should be fine, I should note I won’t be able to attend the one afterwards, on the 31st.

+1w wfm

Great, then we'll try +1W and see if more Council members appear.

6) AOB

anyone?

well, that's a clear message

7) EOM

Thanks Ge0rG for chairing today. :)

Kev: your timing couldn't have been better.

Sorry, I was intending to be here, but was laid out in one of our meeting pods asleeep. Not feeling well.

I hope you get better soon

Ta.