XMPP Council - 2019-12-04

  1. moparisthebest has left

  2. moparisthebest has joined

  3. debacle has left

  4. lnj has left

  5. lnj has joined

  6. paul has joined

  7. vaulor has left

  8. vaulor has joined

  9. jonas’


  10. jonas’

    I hope I’ll be able to chair this afternoon. I got quite sick overnight, but I’m hopeful that it evens out until later.

  11. jonas’

    if it doesn’t and in fact becomes worse, is someone able to take over?

  12. jonas’

    (Ge0rG already excused himself)

  13. daniel

    I can

  14. jonas’

    daniel, thanks

  15. debacle has joined

  16. lnj has left

  17. debacle has left

  18. tacobang has joined

  19. tacobang has left

  20. lnj has joined

  21. vanitasvitae has left

  22. vanitasvitae has joined

  23. Kev_ has left

  24. Wojtek has joined

  25. debacle has joined

  26. Tobias has left

  27. Tobias has joined

  28. Wojtek has left

  29. Wojtek has joined

  30. Zash


  31. dwd

    Hiya folks. Sorry, meeting overran.

  32. daniel


  33. jonas’

    I’m here

  34. jonas’

    but I’d prefer if someone else chaired for today, as mentioned earlier

  35. Zash

    I also just came out of another meeting \o/

  36. dwd

    daniel, You want to, or shall I?

  37. daniel

    dwd, go ahead

  38. dwd


  39. dwd

    1) Roll Call

  40. jonas’

  41. Zash

  42. dwd

    OK, Ge0rG sent apologies already, so that's all of us.

  43. dwd

    2) Agenda Bashing

  44. dwd

    I don't know what is on the agenda at all. Do we have anything to vote on?

  45. daniel

    it wasn’t on the agenda. but i'd like to vote on reactions

  46. daniel

    (there was nothing else on the agenda jonas’ sent')

  47. dwd

    daniel, WHat sort of vote?

  48. jonas’

    accept as experimental exp

  49. jonas’

    accept as experimental xep

  50. dwd

    Ah. OK.

  51. dwd

    3) Items for a vote:

  52. dwd

    a) Reactions: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/reactions.html : Adopt as XEP.

  53. jonas’


  54. dwd

    This is unchanged since the previous Council session, where it was rejected because the COuncil wanted it based on some common form (which Kev later wrote and which was accepted).

  55. Zash

    I haven't refreshed myself on the threads yet.

  56. dwd

    I'm a little nervous of setting a precedent where votes of one Council can be re-run unchanged, so people can "wait out" the Council, so I'm -1 on the basis that the previous Council's recommendations have been ignored.

  57. jonas’

    I’d like to mention that the authors of Reactions are unhappy with the Message Fastening proposal

  58. jonas’

    and that their concerns have not been addressed

  59. jonas’

    so I guess this is a bit more than just waiting out council

  60. daniel

    i understand that position. i think there are problems with that

  61. jonas’

    daniel, "that" = dwd’s or the authors?

  62. daniel


  63. daniel


  64. jonas’

    follow up: problems with that position ("rejecting on the basis of...") or problems with the way this was re-proposed?

  65. jonas’

    my position on this is: - there are still problems with fastening which haven’t been addressed (e.g. the overlap with attaching), at all, not even with a reply on the list - we still don’t have reactions in our ecosystem

  66. jonas’

    accepting this ProtoXEP allows the community to continue development of reactions

  67. daniel

    i understand the problems of 'reverting a previous' councils postion'

  68. daniel

    but in that case i think council was just wrong

  69. jonas’

    I understand (and am actually concerned myself) that reactions will be one of those things which are hard to chnage (like e2ee) once put in place

  70. dwd

    Yeah, look, I voted for Reactions originally. The entire situation irritates me enormously.

  71. jonas’

    and I think it wasn’t entirely wrong to veto it in the first round, because there was the promise to get a proper base protocol for attaching things

  72. jonas’

    we haven’t gotten that

  73. jonas’

    Message Fastening had its chance, it passed, let’s move on with Reactions.

  74. jonas’

    I think what has changed is that the time has passed, and this warrants a re-vote

  75. jonas’

    (but, for the record, I also totally see your concern, dwd. but I think my argument is slightly stronger)

  76. dwd

    Well, I'm willing to change that firm -1 to a holding vote, and I'm willing to dig into this further. I'd really love to have Reactions, and sure, if we had a generic method of "fastening" or whatever that'd be even better.

  77. daniel

    if you ignore all the fastening stuff for a second and look at the xep just by itself it is actually a good, clearly written document

  78. dwd

    But I really don't want to start a pattern of waiting out the Council session. FWIW, had this been re-raised last Council instead of just waiting out the session I'd have been considerably more receptive.

  79. daniel

    of better quality than a lot of other experimental xeps

  80. dwd

    daniel, I know, I voted for it last time.

  81. jonas’

    dwd, one could argue that there was no realistic chance of council properly re-voting within the term, given the business around the 2020 CS suites.

  82. jonas’

    but yeah, they should’ve tried

  83. jonas’

    I’d like to note that we’re at 66% of our meeting time.

  84. dwd

    So anyway - "time has passed" is definitely insufficient in and of itself, and when "time has passed" is merely a euphemism for "Kev has left Council" I'm very worried.

  85. daniel

    well there is no other topic on the agenda and i think it's an important topic

  86. dwd

    I see only one vote, is that correct? (Ignoring mine for now).

  87. daniel


  88. jonas’

    daniel, agreed, I’m just not sure if we can get to a resolution without everyone reviewing how things have happened

  89. Kev

    FWIW, it's not clear to me what Fastening needs fixing, and I'm happy to fix it.

  90. daniel

    not sure that voting is the most important thing here. we should instead 'figure out the situation'

  91. Kev

    And, indeed, my original offer to do the legwork on Reactions in that light still stands.

  92. jonas’

    Kev, I think a good first step would be to reply to all the feedback on-list: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2019-September/036422.html

  93. dwd

    I'll commit to re-reviewing Fastening and Reactions and the feedback.

  94. jonas’

    Kev, the authors of Reactions have told me they felt ghosted (not their words) and their feedback left unheard.

  95. dwd

    Kev, And FWIW, I would appreciate your comments on-list to that feedback too.

  96. Kev

    Ah. Looks like that all fell during my holiday last year and so got missed.

  97. jonas’

    which I totally understand given the radio silence on-list

  98. Zash

    I'll go with on-list so I can re-read all the threads.

  99. dwd

    OK, so I think we have a way to get some progress, and therefore I shall move the topic on.

  100. daniel

    doing 'fastening' right (with proper MAM retrieval) feels like a thing that will literally take years

  101. daniel

    it's good to get started on 'fastening'

  102. daniel

    i don’t think that reactions should be blocked by that

  103. Kev

    (My view at the time was that once you've got Fastening you can move on to archive queries for it)

  104. Kev

    (And aware that Dave wants to move things on)

  105. dwd

    daniel, That's a perfectly fine viewpoint, and one that the last Council disagreed with.

  106. dwd

    4) Next Meeting

  107. dwd

    Does this meeting time work for everyone?

  108. jonas’

    it does

  109. jonas’

    it does for me

  110. daniel


  111. dwd

    It works (mostly) for me.

  112. dwd

    So same time next week, then.

  113. dwd

    5) Any Other Business

  114. jonas’

    not from me today

  115. Zash

    +1w should work for me too

  116. dwd

    I have resurrected the spreadsheet of Doom: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ANu9KGmNf2r-qpLYqF7NdJTtqA1GIu55rf2deKbM0GA/edit?usp=sharing

  117. dwd

    I'm willing to give edit access to whoever wants it (needs a Google account), and I can endeavour to keep it up to date (but sadly cannot promise).

  118. jonas’

    dwd, jonas@sotecware.net please

  119. jonas’

    sent a request using the UI

  120. Zash


  121. dwd

    Zash, But you should be able to view without and nag us if votes are missed. :-)

  122. dwd

    Any Other AOB?

  123. daniel

    so wait; what was the outcome? a) we can’t revote because previous council already voted b) people will review what happened?

  124. daniel

    dwd, no

  125. dwd

    daniel, (b).

  126. dwd

    In that case:

  127. dwd

    6) Ite, Meeting Est

  128. dwd

    And thanks all.

  129. Kev

    Although it's not immediately clear to me that Council /can/ revisit the same topic in subsequent terms to overturn it.

  130. jonas’

    edit access confirmed

  131. jonas’

    thanks for jumping in, dwd

  132. Kev

    But as long as they're doing sensible things, I think it's unlikely anyone is going to complain on a point of process.

  133. dwd

    Kev, I think it probbaly /can/ - but it feels bad form at least. Especially given we're only a couple of months along from the last vote.

  134. daniel

    imho the situation has changed. not necessarily the xep; but how we look at it. a couple of months ago people thought 'fasting' is going to be easy. then people looked into it (fastening) and figured out that it is more complex than we thought

  135. daniel

    and that's the basis for a revote

  136. Zash

    Were there any other relevant threads than the one larma linked to?

  137. dwd

    daniel, Possibly. But I think the bar for altering the vote of a Council within about two months of that Council vote has to be pretty high.

  138. moparisthebest

    what's the purpose of voting for a new council then?

  139. moparisthebest

    if you run on "I'll do things different from before" but then it's not ok to actually do them different? :/

  140. Kev has left

  141. Guus has left

  142. Guus has joined

  143. debacle has left

  144. Kev has joined

  145. debacle has joined

  146. Wojtek has left

  147. Neustradamus has left

  148. Neustradamus has joined

  149. Neustradamus has left

  150. Neustradamus has joined

  151. lnj has left

  152. lnj has joined

  153. daniel has left

  154. daniel has joined

  155. lnj has left

  156. lnj has joined

  157. Tobias has left

  158. paul has left

  159. Guus has left

  160. Guus has joined

  161. debacle has left