XMPP Council - 2020-12-02

1) Roll Call

OMG What!?

I'm awake

My calendar is lying

dwd, daniel

Hi

Hiya

wee, full house

2) Agenda Bashing

anything to add/remove/modify?

assuming no

3) Editor’s Update * New ProtoXEP: Automatic Trust Management

* Also, restart of two LCs which affect Council

4) Items for voting

Does everyone agree to the working agreement that we will have 14 day voting periods starting at the first meeting where the agendum is discussed?

Worked well enough this past year.

That's not on the Agenda!

I’m explicitly asking because there are documents on xmpp.org which say quite otherwise

:O

I like the 14 day period as it gives you two Council Meetings to catch up. Let's continue it

They loosely say it's when the Editor puts them before Council that the 14 day starts, but I thought we'd fixed that?

curiously enough, they state that the XMPP Editor sets the voting period, which is even stranger

but ok, it seems everyone is in broad agreement, please let me know until end of meeting if otherwise

4a) PR#1014: XEP-0176: Improve compatibility with WebRTC clients URL: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1014

On list

I'm honestly not entirely sure about the implications

On list for this, sorry, I need to find some WebRTC expertise.

same

(on list)

on-list

Uh, looked almost editorial, with only the schema change?

jonas’, [[ Can I flag some AOB, please, before I forget? ]]

dwd, yes

Zash, I think we should ask the PR author to add some wording to the normative part in order to tie the change down properly if we agree to it

Zash, any vote?

Noted, thanks.

on-list I suppose. anyone got WebRTC expertise we can drag into reviewing this? :)

Zash, maybe the web client folks

Zash, I'm talking to Fippo now.

dwd, excellent

moving on, given the time

it'd be great to have webrtc folks feedback on-list

4b) PR#1008: XEP-0047: fix incorrect max sequence number URL: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1008 Abstract: Previously the text said that the max sequence number was 65535 (max unsigned 16 bit integer), but also said this was (1<<15)-1, which is actually max signed 16 bit integer or 32767.

+1

On list

I think this is fair enough, +1

This one I'm +1 on; it's just fixing a typo in a parenthetical remark.

+1

4c) PR#1001: XEP-0393: clarify rules for span directives URL: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1001 I think Dave missed the deadline last term. If I just overlooked the vote, please let me know.

yeah...

I am still +0

+1

0+, again

+1

dwd, ?

Erm. I don't recall this one at all before.

fun!

it was the one I asked you all not to let expire ;D

And I'm not sure I understand it, so I'll go for on-list, sorry.

alright

4d) Proposed XMPP Extension: Automatic Trust Management URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/automatic-trust-management.html Abstract: This document specifies a way to automatically manage the trust in public long-term keys used by end-to-end encryption protocols.

on-list

I *might* have to write this all out as ABNF in order to understand it.

dwd, please do, and then put it in the XEP

dwd, if you do, you get all the +1s

that proto-xep goes in the sad tradition of XEP authors redefining commonly-used acronyms

On list

on-list

dwd, ?

Zash, too

on-list

Didn't this one come up before?

ATM?

I don’t think so

Or was it just something very similar?

it was newly added to inbox

dwd, https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0434.html probably?

this one seems to be mostly policy, while 434 is the wire format

Yeah, I'll go on-list for this.

alright

5) Pending Votes

only the new ones \o/

6) Date of Next

+1w?

+1w.

+1w

7) AOB

dwd, the stage is yours

Hooray.

If we can codify our voting policy/system, which seems to have been unchanged for years, I'll write it up in standards-speak and stick it in XEP-0001.

sgtm

note that much of it is already codified in the bylaws

I'll try to come up with some text for next week, but have a think on how you think we vote first to make sureit aligns.

jonas’, Oh, quite possibly.

I read the bylaws closely when I built that council bot a while back, and we have fully adhered to my understanding of those in the last term

this is my literal codification of it: https://github.com/horazont/councilbot/blob/master/councilbot/state.py#L268-L319

Yeah, I think XEP-0001 is wrong, here. (Or we are, but we can fix that by changing XEP-0001).

(Me done)

alright

anyone else?

nah

then...

8) Ite Meeting Est

thanks everyone

thanks!

Thanks