XMPP Council - 2020-06-10

  1. kusoneko has left

  2. kusoneko has joined

  3. stpeter has left

  4. debacle has left

  5. daniel has left

  6. paul has left

  7. daniel has joined

  8. stpeter has joined

  9. undefined has left

  10. undefined has joined

  11. stpeter has left

  12. Wojtek has left

  13. stpeter has joined

  14. kusoneko has left

  15. stpeter has left

  16. daniel has left

  17. daniel has joined

  18. stpeter has joined

  19. kusoneko has joined

  20. kusoneko has left

  21. kusoneko has joined

  22. stpeter has left

  23. kusoneko has left

  24. kusoneko has joined

  25. stpeter has joined

  26. stpeter has left

  27. kusoneko has left

  28. kusoneko has joined

  29. stpeter has joined

  30. stpeter has left

  31. stpeter has joined

  32. Tobias has joined

  33. raspbeguy has joined

  34. daniel has left

  35. stpeter has left

  36. daniel has joined

  37. stpeter has joined

  38. daniel has left

  39. daniel has joined

  40. stpeter has left

  41. paul has joined

  42. stpeter has joined

  43. daniel has left

  44. daniel has joined

  45. stpeter has left

  46. kusoneko has left

  47. kusoneko has joined

  48. stpeter has joined

  49. bear has left

  50. sonny has left

  51. sonny has joined

  52. stpeter has left

  53. stpeter has joined

  54. stpeter has left

  55. bear has joined

  56. sonny has left

  57. sonny has joined

  58. stpeter has joined

  59. debacle has joined

  60. stpeter has left

  61. rion has joined

  62. stpeter has joined

  63. stpeter has left

  64. stpeter has joined

  65. stpeter has left

  66. stpeter has joined

  67. debacle has left

  68. stpeter has left

  69. debacle has joined

  70. stpeter has joined

  71. sonny has left

  72. sonny has joined

  73. stpeter has left

  74. undefined has left

  75. undefined has joined

  76. stpeter has joined

  77. rion has left

  78. stpeter has left

  79. debacle has left

  80. debacle has joined

  81. debacle has left

  82. debacle has joined

  83. stpeter has joined

  84. rion has joined

  85. sonny has left

  86. sonny has joined

  87. stpeter has left

  88. stpeter has joined

  89. stpeter has left

  90. stpeter has joined

  91. stpeter has left

  92. stpeter has joined

  93. undefined has left

  94. stpeter has left

  95. undefined has joined

  96. stpeter has joined

  97. stpeter has left

  98. stpeter has joined

  99. stpeter has left

  100. stpeter has joined

  101. Syndace has left

  102. Syndace has joined

  103. jonas’

    'tis time

  104. jonas’

    1) Roll Call

  105. Zash


  106. jonas’

  107. daniel


  108. jonas’


  109. jonas’

    do we get a Ge0rG or a dwd maybe?

  110. dwd


  111. Ge0rG

    Yes we do!

  112. Zash

    Full house!

  113. jonas’

    500 Missing Hostname

  114. daniel

    wrong protocol

  115. jonas’ closes connection to dwd

  116. dwd

    Oh. Shit.

  117. jonas’

    2) Agenda Bashingf

  118. jonas’

    2) Agenda Bashing

  119. jonas’

    I assume none

  120. jonas’

    3) Editor’s update - Expiring calls - CFE for XEP-0050 (ended on 2020-06-09)

  121. jonas’

    4) Items for Voting

  122. jonas’

    I did not include the advancement vote of '0050 in here, because I presume that we’ll have more discussion about that in 4b. If anyone wants to have the vote on advancing '0050 to Final in this meeting either way, please speak up now.

  123. jonas’

    assuming no, but you can still raise your voice until we’ve gotten past 4b

  124. jonas’

    moving on

  125. jonas’

    4a) PR#959: XEP-0156: reorganize stating XRD/JRD requirements URL: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/959 Abstract: The reference to RFC 6120 was incorrect, what this really meant is RFC 6415. But instead of simply s/RFC 6120/RFC 6415/ here, I decided to reorganize stating the requirements of XRD and JRD a little.

  126. daniel


  127. jonas’

    I’m not quite sure if this adds new requirements on implementations, or if those are already implicit in RFC 6415

  128. Zash

    On list.

  129. daniel

    like what?

  130. Ge0rG

    I'm not sure because it removes a "REQUIRED" and adds a "SHOULD

  131. jonas’


  132. jonas’

    oh, no, it doesn’t change anything

  133. jonas’

    I can’t read.

  134. jonas’

    so, yeah, it moves from MUST XML to SHOULD XML, and SHOULD JSON to MAY JSON.

  135. jonas’

    I’m not quite sure what the point of that is

  136. jonas’

    flow, are you around?

  137. jonas’

    this seems odd to me, because now clients have to effectively support both since a service may opt to do no XML but JSON.

  138. daniel

    fair. I retract my +1. I didn’t see that

  139. jonas’

    barring a magical appearance of flow, I’m on-list

  140. jonas’

    any word from dwd?

  141. flow


  142. Ge0rG

    I'm also on-list then. I suppose that if we fix the new language to keep the old MUST/SHOULD, I'd be fine

  143. bear has left

  144. jonas’

    same as Ge0rG from my side

  145. daniel

    > I suppose that if we fix the new language to keep the old MUST/SHOULD, I'd be fine yes

  146. jonas’

    flow, ah, good, can you comment?

  147. flow

    reading the change

  148. dwd

    Yeah, I'll do a -1 on the basis that we've changed normative requirements.

  149. flow

    ahh I see

  150. dwd

    (But I can be argued out of it).

  151. jonas’

    dwd, without context, that sounds odd and I think you wanted to add a "without good reason" :)

  152. flow

    can change

  153. dwd

    jonas’, Sorry, in full:

  154. jonas’

    flow, excellent, then we’ll postpone this to next week

  155. jonas’

    and I’ll cancel the vote

  156. flow

    but given that there is no feature negotion about this

  157. flow

    a MUST did not appears necessary

  158. Ge0rG

    https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6415#section-3 reads like a MUST for XML

  159. flow

    what I wanted to express is that you are not allowed to do JRD alone, without XRD

  160. dwd

    jonas’, -1 on the basis that we have changed normative requirements such that it is unclear what a consumer of the record need to implement to ensure interoperability.

  161. flow

    but a MUST is probably clearer

  162. jonas’

    flow, that is not at all clear from the text, please fix that

  163. jonas’

    okay, moving on

  164. jonas’

    4b) PR#598: XEP-0050: Try to clarify usage of 'execute' URL: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/598 Abstract: The "execute" dilemma of XEP-0050.

  165. jonas’

    I added wording to the PR compared to last week using my editor superpowers

  166. jonas’

    specifically, I added this: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/598/commits/fc14df1d8d49a065115cb4549e66e243db4b6ce3 (note that this only shows a subset of the total changes the PR introduces)

  167. jonas’

    (full changes are here: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/598/files )

  168. jonas’

    I think this is the best we can do and I am +1 on this as-is.

  169. daniel

    on list

  170. Zash

    on list

  171. Ge0rG


  172. dwd

    I think I'm +1 on this. Though we're deep into "least harm" territory, and I'll be interested in what others have to say.

  173. jonas’


  174. jonas’

    since we’re considering adopting this, the advancement vote shall be postponed with another CFE later inbetween.

  175. jonas’

    5) Outstanding votes

  176. jonas’

    Ge0rG, I think you have quite a few, unless I’m behind on the mailing list mails.

  177. jonas’

    oh, I am actually

  178. paul has left

  179. Ge0rG

    jonas’: remember my inquiry about the origins of *bold* and _underline_ earlier today?

  180. dwd

    jonas’, Just on '50, I'm not sure that we *can* advance until people think (at least) that they implement the new version.

  181. Ge0rG

    jonas’: I catched up with two-weeks-ago, and I'm not sure there were any votes last week

  182. jonas’

    dwd, yes, hence, later :)

  183. jonas’

    Ge0rG, no, you’re good, I’ve got everything from you now

  184. Ge0rG


  185. jonas’

    thank you for that

  186. jonas’

    6) Date of Next

  187. jonas’

    +1w wfm

  188. daniel

    +1w wfm

  189. Zash

    +1w wfm

  190. Ge0rG

    +1W WFM

  191. jonas’


  192. jonas’

    7) AOB

  193. jonas’

    I have one regarding the Message Routing stuff.

  194. Ge0rG

    I've heard that pep. and flow have an AOB

  195. Ge0rG

    jonas’: I still didn't manage to do the doodle.

  196. jonas’

    First I need to say mea culpa, because I got massively confused with dates and now more than half of the proposed timing lots is over.

  197. jonas’

    Ge0rG, good thing is you only need to fill out like three days now.

  198. jonas’

    Ge0rG, you have the nice opportunity to just pick one of the greenish slots onw

  199. jonas’

    today would’ve worked great, but that’s not an option anymore, so I think Friday at 16:00 CEST is the only one we have left

  200. pep.

    Ge0rG, well I'm not sure :x

  201. jonas’

    Ge0rG, would that work for you?

  202. Ge0rG

    jonas’: +1 for Friday 16:00 CEST

  203. pep.

    I'd like to sort out the hanging PR about 0157 for sure. I don't know what to take off the list thread

  204. jonas’

    ok, I’ll try to send out an email after this meeting.

  205. Ge0rG

    pep.: I read the thread as a generally vague +1 with a hint to add a .well-known mapping

  206. jonas’

    on the '157: My opinion is that dwd is absolutely correct and we should extend '68 to allow validation information.

  207. jonas’

    (and also that dwd is correct in that we need a fixed registry)

  208. Ge0rG

    somebody should fix it

  209. jonas’

    yeah, somebody should

  210. jonas’

    hm, I should ping MattJ if we can set up old-eos as a build worker for docker images...

  211. jonas’


  212. jonas’

    pep., flow, I think the best way forward would be to update '68 and then update '157

  213. flow

    I like to suggest that we see registry and their entries as extensible, instead of explicitly marking them

  214. jonas’

    the '157 PR can then stay as-is and we can apply it once '68 is patched.

  215. flow

    I mean this is a general thing, not limited to data forms

  216. jonas’

    I’m hesitant about that, but an extended discussion should be continued on-list as pep suggested indeed.

  217. flow

    We will in the future most likely run into situations where an xep extends another xep, and its elements, which are potentially found in a registry

  218. jonas’

    any other AOB?

  219. dwd

    flow, Registries aren't interoperable protocols, they're documents of record, and as such have different rules.

  220. flow

    dwd, sure, but what does that mean?

  221. dwd

    flow, Same argument, after all, applies the the XEP format itself.

  222. pep.

    (jonas’, is that what I suggested? :p)

  223. jonas’

    pep., in fact, no, but I misread what you said, apologies

  224. jonas’

    I’m not good at reading tonight

  225. jonas’

    I still think that this is better suited for xsf@ or the list.

  226. pep.


  227. jonas’

    assuming no other AOB:

  228. jonas’

    7) Ite Meeting Est

  229. dwd

    jonas’, Thanks!

  230. jonas’

    thanks all, thanks Tedd

  231. Zash

    Tanks all

  232. jonas’

    please move further discussion about the registry things to xsf@

  233. Ge0rG


  234. jonas’

    (or the list)

  235. flow

    FYI, i've updated the PR of 4a

  236. paul has joined

  237. Wojtek has joined

  238. bear has joined

  239. undefined has left

  240. undefined has joined

  241. sonny has left

  242. sonny has joined

  243. sonny has left

  244. sonny has joined

  245. sonny has left

  246. sonny has joined

  247. sonny has left

  248. sonny has joined

  249. sonny has left

  250. sonny has joined

  251. sonny has left

  252. sonny has joined

  253. debacle has left

  254. kusoneko has left

  255. kusoneko has joined

  256. kusoneko has left

  257. kusoneko has joined

  258. kusoneko has left

  259. kusoneko has joined

  260. kusoneko has left

  261. kusoneko has joined

  262. kusoneko has left

  263. kusoneko has joined

  264. kusoneko has left

  265. kusoneko has joined

  266. kusoneko has left

  267. kusoneko has joined

  268. kusoneko has left

  269. kusoneko has joined

  270. debacle has joined

  271. Lance has joined

  272. rion has left

  273. Zash has left

  274. stpeter has left

  275. sonny has left

  276. sonny has joined

  277. sonny has left

  278. sonny has joined

  279. undefined has left

  280. undefined has joined

  281. Lance has left

  282. stpeter has joined

  283. bear has left

  284. Lance has joined

  285. Lance has left

  286. Tobias has left

  287. Lance has joined

  288. paul has left

  289. bear has joined

  290. paul has joined

  291. Lance has left

  292. Lance has joined

  293. kusoneko has left

  294. kusoneko has joined

  295. kusoneko has left

  296. kusoneko has joined

  297. Zash has joined

  298. daniel has left

  299. daniel has joined

  300. stpeter has left

  301. debacle has left