XMPP Council - 2021-06-16

  1. Zash has left
  2. larma has left
  3. Kev has left
  4. Kev has joined
  5. Tobias has joined
  6. Kev has left
  7. Kev has joined
  8. Kev has left
  9. Kev has joined
  10. marc0s has left
  11. marc0s has joined
  12. Kev has left
  13. Kev has joined
  14. Kev has left
  15. Kev has joined
  16. Kev has left
  17. Kev has joined
  18. debacle has joined
  19. marc0s has left
  20. marc0s has joined
  21. marc0s has left
  22. marc0s has joined
  23. marc0s has left
  24. marc0s has joined
  25. mdosch has left
  26. mdosch has joined
  27. debacle has left
  28. sonny has left
  29. sonny has joined
  30. debacle has joined
  31. daniel has left
  32. Wojtek has joined
  33. daniel has joined
  34. Zash has joined
  35. debacle has left
  36. sonny has left
  37. sonny has joined
  38. Sam Hi council, the 2020 Compliance Suites are still showing up as a draft standard. Please vote to fix. Thanks: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html
  39. Zash This feels like a thing that should be automatic, but a quick scan of XEP-0001 says that's on advance to Final
  40. Zash > A Standards Track XEP is in the Final state after it has been in the Draft state for at least six (6) months, [...] That part feels a bit stressful with annual compliance suites...
  41. Sam I'm sure we discussed this, but shouldn't they just be informational?
  42. Sam No new protocol and they seem to define "best practices for implementation or deployment of an existing protocol"
  43. Zash It's been discussed. Changing it is up to Board since it's defined by XEP-0001.
  44. jonas’ and nobody cared to bring it to board
  45. jonas’ and nobody cared enough to bring it to board
  46. jonas’ XEP-0001 explicitly states that compliance suites are Standards Track
  47. jonas’ so that’d need changing
  48. Sam I mean, nobody has to bring it up separately right? Just change next years to experimental and vote as normal?
  49. Ge0rG sounds like a PR for Board
  50. Sam oh, does it? Nevermind then
  51. Zash What we could do is try to hold a fixed schedule for compliance suites?
  52. Sam yah, maybe I'll propose some language. I suppose they could be standards track and just skip a few steps too
  53. Ge0rG I wouldn't mind them being Informational, but I'm not the author any more!
  54. Ge0rG Sam: explicitly writing down that they shall be informational is a Good Thing, isn't it?
  55. Sam Zash: I already tried that, without language forcing the matter nobody could agree in a timely manner.
  56. Sam Ge0rG: I don't see why it would matter, we might decide it was a mistake and want to switch later so I'd say let it be either
  57. Ge0rG Zash: I also tried that, but calculating the required run-off times to publish a new Draft CS for Christmas was *hard*
  58. Sam The only reason it would be nice if they were informational is to skip "Draft" which is only nice because "Draft" is a confusing word
  59. Ge0rG Sam: if we decide it was an error we can revert the change. Please don't make our protocols more vague
  60. Sam So maybe the answer is "propose changes to standards track process" and "propose automatic advancement/deferral of compliance suites"
  61. Sam It's not vague, it's at the authors discretion just like every other XEP
  62. Sam (or would be)
  63. Zash Could start with poking whomever needs poking to advance CS-2021 to Final?
  64. Sam I mean, I have no preference either way, informational just seems semantically correct but that's not worth making changes over at all as far as I'm concerned unless we're just happening to be messing with the process anyways
  65. Zash That should automatically obsolete CS-2020
  66. Sam "XEP may be approved provisionally and be assigned an expiration date", huh, I didn't remember that this was a thing
  67. Sam So we can already be doing this I guess
  68. Ge0rG but Editor process!
  69. Sam Editor process? Isn't "do what council says" the editor process?
  70. Sam I had a tool somewhere that checked for XEPs that were out of date (experimental that needed to be deferred and what not) and more CI oriented things like missing revision blocks and what not. I should revive that and add compliance suites as a special case
  71. Ge0rG 👍
  72. Zash Moar automation!
  73. Ge0rG `if title.startsWith("Compliance Suite ") ...`
  74. jonas’ *slap*
  75. Sam ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ seems fine for a simple tool meant to be run on CI
  76. Sam (as long as time-based rules and problems that don't change are two steps so that the time-based or title-based ones that may have false positives aren't blocking CI)
  77. larma has joined
  78. Wojtek has left
  79. SouL has left
  80. SouL has joined
  81. stpeter has joined
  82. paul has left
  83. paul has joined
  84. Ge0rG It looks like it's almost time!
  85. jonas’ 1) Roll Call
  86. jonas’ I was already anxiously hovering over the enter key
  87. jonas’ and I think I need to check my clocks
  88. Zash Hello
  89. daniel Hi
  90. Ge0rG
  91. jonas’ they both claim to be on ntp tho, so whatever
  92. jonas’ do we have a dwd today?
  93. jonas’ let’s see :)
  94. jonas’ 2) Agenda Bashing
  95. jonas’ I hear that we need to do something about the CS-2020, but I’m not sure what we can do
  96. dwd has joined
  97. Sam obsolete them.
  98. Ge0rG burn it with fire
  99. jonas’ we can CFE it, but realistically, nothing is going to happen there and it’s just noise in everyones inboxes
  100. Sam The 2021 ones have been draft for ages, why are there two?
  101. jonas’ ehh right, it’s 2021 already
  102. jonas’ ^ that might be why
  103. jonas’ so I’ll add a vote to obsolete the CS-2020
  104. dwd Hiya, sorry, meeting overrunning.
  105. dwd I'll be sort-of paying some attention until it's done.
  106. jonas’ and we can think about what to do with the 2021 one because a CFE feels pointless and tiresome
  107. jonas’ dwd, good luck :)
  108. jonas’ 3) Editor’s Update
  109. jonas’ * Proposed XMPP Extension: Pre-auth Registration Key Generation and Validation
  110. jonas’ 4) Items for Voting
  111. jonas’ 4a) PR#1064: XEP-0227: New revision 1.1 URL: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1064 Abstract: - Discourage inclusion of plaintext passwords - Document a format for including SCRAM data - Define data formats for PEP and MAM data
  112. jonas’ +1
  113. daniel +1
  114. Ge0rG on-list
  115. Zash on-list
  116. jonas’ assuming dwd is going to be on-list because only sort-of paying some attention right now
  117. jonas’ 4b) Deprecate and Obsolete XEP-0423: XMPP Compliance Suites 2020 URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html
  118. jonas’ +1
  119. Zash +1
  120. daniel +1
  121. daniel Wait deprecate *and* obsolete?
  122. jonas’ yes
  123. daniel Isn't it either or?
  124. jonas’ no
  125. daniel Ok
  126. jonas’ we need to first deprecate before we can obsolete according to the graph in '1
  127. daniel Ah OK that makes sense
  128. jonas’ (I looked it up just before typing the 4b ;))
  129. jonas’ Ge0rG, ?
  130. Ge0rG +1
  131. Ge0rG Sorry
  132. jonas’ 5) Pending Votes
  133. jonas’ the agenda mail was a lie, daniel is pending on https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1066
  134. daniel +1
  135. jonas’ \o/
  136. jonas’ thanks
  137. jonas’ 6) Date of Next
  138. jonas’ +1w wfm
  139. Zash +1w wfm
  140. daniel I might not make it. But not worth rescheduling I guess
  141. jonas’ I guess we’ll gamble on quorum then :)
  142. Ge0rG I think I'll make it
  143. jonas’ 7) AOB
  144. jonas’ 7a) Code of Conduct Experimental Procedural XEP
  145. jonas’ you may have noticed that there is that CoC XEP
  146. Zash May have, indeed.
  147. jonas’ Just wanna point it out in case you managed to miss it. Since the document calls members of board and council out specifically, it’s probably worth reading and discussing.
  148. jonas’ and also a note that it is only Experimental, not Active yet, as some seem to think.
  149. jonas’ anyway, we don’t need to discuss here, on-list (members@ or standards@) is the better place
  150. jonas’ any other AOB?
  151. jonas’ taking the silence and absence of typing chat states as a no
  152. jonas’ 8) Ite Meeting Est
  153. jonas’ bangs the gavel
  154. jonas’ thanks everyone, thanks tedd :)
  155. Zash Does Dino even send typing notifications here?
  156. daniel Thanks Zash
  157. Ge0rG thanks jonas’
  158. Zash Thanks Ge0rG
  159. debacle has joined
  160. Ge0rG Thanks Zash
  161. Kev has left
  162. Kev has joined
  163. debacle has left
  164. Kev has left
  165. Kev has joined
  166. larma has left
  167. larma has joined
  168. Kev has left
  169. Kev has joined
  170. Kev has left
  171. Kev has joined
  172. Kev has left
  173. Kev has joined
  174. marc0s has left
  175. marc0s has joined
  176. Kev has left
  177. Kev has joined
  178. Kev has left
  179. Kev has joined
  180. Guus has joined
  181. Guus has left
  182. pprrks has left
  183. pprrks has joined
  184. debacle has joined
  185. marc0s has left
  186. marc0s has joined
  187. marc0s has left
  188. marc0s has joined
  189. Tobias has left
  190. marc0s has left
  191. marc0s has joined
  192. marc0s has left
  193. marc0s has joined
  194. marc0s has left
  195. marc0s has joined
  196. marc0s has left
  197. marc0s has joined
  198. marc0s has left
  199. marc0s has joined
  200. marc0s has left
  201. marc0s has joined
  202. Kev has left
  203. Kev has joined
  204. Kev has left
  205. Kev has joined
  206. stpeter has left
  207. marc0s has left
  208. marc0s has joined
  209. Kev has left
  210. Kev has joined