XMPP Council - 2021-06-23

  1. stpeter has left
  2. Kev has left
  3. Kev has joined
  4. Kev has left
  5. Kev has joined
  6. stpeter has joined
  7. stpeter has left
  8. stpeter has joined
  9. stpeter has left
  10. paul has left
  11. Tobias has joined
  12. Kev has left
  13. Kev has joined
  14. paul has joined
  15. pprrks has left
  16. pprrks has joined
  17. Kev has left
  18. Holger has left
  19. Kev has joined
  20. Kev has left
  21. Kev has joined
  22. debacle has joined
  23. Kev has left
  24. Kev has joined
  25. Kev has left
  26. Kev has joined
  27. marc0s has left
  28. marc0s has joined
  29. debacle has left
  30. Holger has joined
  31. daniel has left
  32. paul has left
  33. paul has joined
  34. daniel has joined
  35. Wojtek has joined
  36. paul has left
  37. paul has joined
  38. sonny has left
  39. sonny has joined
  40. moparisthebest has left
  41. moparisthebest has joined
  42. Kev has left
  43. Kev has joined
  44. marc0s has left
  45. marc0s has joined
  46. pprrks has left
  47. pprrks has joined
  48. marc0s has left
  49. marc0s has joined
  50. marc0s has left
  51. marc0s has joined
  52. stpeter has joined
  53. stpeter has left
  54. stpeter has joined
  55. stpeter has left
  56. sonny has left
  57. sonny has joined
  58. stpeter has joined
  59. marc0s has left
  60. marc0s has joined
  61. mdosch has left
  62. marc0s has left
  63. marc0s has joined
  64. mdosch has joined
  65. Kev has left
  66. Kev has joined
  67. Kev has left
  68. Kev has joined
  69. Kev has left
  70. Kev has joined
  71. jonas’ 1) Roll Call
  72. jonas’ do we get a dwd?
  73. jonas’ or a Ge0rG?
  74. jonas’ or a daniel?
  75. jonas’ or a Zash?
  76. daniel I'm here
  77. jonas’ noone else?
  78. Zash Here
  79. jonas’ yay
  80. jonas’ that's quorum
  81. jonas’ 2) Agenda Bashing
  82. jonas’ please just mention things during the meeting
  83. jonas’ 3) Editor’s Update * Compliance Suites 2022 accepted as XEP-0459
  84. Zash Things!
  85. jonas’ 4) Items for voting
  86. jonas’ I do not think there is anything
  87. jonas’ 5) Pending Votes - Georg, Dave and Kim on https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1064 - Dave on Deprecate and Obsolote Compliance Suites 2020
  88. jonas’ Zash, wanna cast?
  89. Zash Not at this time.
  90. jonas’ ok
  91. dwd has joined
  92. jonas’ 6) Date of Next
  93. Zash A wild dwd appears
  94. jonas’ oh!
  95. dwd Argh. Sorry.
  96. jonas’ does the wild dwd want to cast votes?
  97. daniel +1 w wfm
  98. Zash +1w wfm
  99. jonas’ (I saw your vote on list)
  100. dwd Yeah. On list for the PR, which I note MattJ has updated now.
  101. jonas’ +1w wfm
  102. dwd And for Compliance Suites 2020, decprecate and obsolete it.
  103. Zash Uh, updating during the vote period..
  104. jonas’ yes I guess we technically need to revote, do we not?
  105. dwd Thought I appreciate the different spelling of "Obsolete" every time.
  106. jonas’ huh?
  107. jonas’ (fwiw, i am on mobilen, it is surprisingly tricky and workable at the same time, but I am also slower)
  108. dwd I would like it if that PR were discussed on list, I imagine that the other server developers might have an opinion, if only to agree.
  109. jonas’ it was posted to the list, but nobody cared
  110. jonas’ so I am not sure what can be improved there
  111. jonas’ +1w it is
  112. jonas’ 5) Pending votes -- PR#1064 discussion
  113. jonas’ so, what do we do? I guess dwd will veto the old version because of his comments so we have to re-vote on the new version
  114. jonas’ question is if we first re-encourage list discussion?
  115. dwd Well if it has been posted to the list (sorry Matt) then there's little more we can do, but it makes me wonder if people care either way.
  116. jonas’ https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2021-June/038338.html
  117. jonas’ it has
  118. marc0s has left
  119. marc0s has joined
  120. dwd I suspect the PR is fine now, I just don't know if discouraging the plaintext password field is going to annoy other server developers or if they don't care, or if they'd welcome the changes.
  121. Zash I said something in xsf@, tho minor
  122. jonas’ well I am sure that prosody will get an implementation and if nobody else cares, having MattJ take care of that seems sensible
  123. daniel the PR doesn’t sound very controversial
  124. dwd Yes, but what happens with ejabberd's implementation, for example?
  125. marc0s has left
  126. marc0s has joined
  127. jonas’ namespace bump?
  128. dwd Would that makes things worse?
  129. daniel new xep? :-)
  130. marc0s has left
  131. marc0s has joined
  132. dwd Even worse? :-)
  133. jonas’ https://uc.xmpp.zombofant.net/82d8419a-9c3b-4e8e-a12b-c8927a7cb56c/xMo_kGpIQgWp3Rq-w2PtBA.jpg
  134. dwd I dunno.
  135. Zash Hasn't the namespace changed a bunch of times already?
  136. jonas’ I think namespace bump is exactly the tool for that
  137. dwd I'm not against the PR, incidentally. i just have no feel for what the community feels as a whole.
  138. jonas’ we cannot force folks to give feedback though
  139. jonas’ we could poke some known server devs for sure
  140. daniel the general vibe i'm getting (not from the PR but from talks I had before that PR came to be) that those changes are welcome and long overdue
  141. dwd We can't force feedback, but it'd be nice to get some support for changing a Draft XEP.
  142. jonas’ daniel: vibe from whom?
  143. daniel on conversations.im for example we have talked about offering import/export to users (especially but not limited to our domain users)
  144. daniel but that has always been held back by 277 not being 'modern' enough
  145. daniel and that PR fixes exactly the problems we had with 227
  146. jonas’ I prefer an unopposed and unsupported change on a Draft XEP over yet another experimental rewrite XEP
  147. jonas’ daniel: those words would have been great on the list
  148. dwd jonas’, Yes, we don't want a rewrite.
  149. dwd But words of support from the ejabberd folks, and/or Openfire, would be great.
  150. jonas’ thats true
  151. jonas’ maybe we can poke Holger or so
  152. jonas’ we need to re-vote anyway
  153. jonas’ so I suggest we do that and poke folks on list in parallel?
  154. dwd I have poked Guus, for Openfire.
  155. jonas’ or do we want to poke first and vote thereafter, ignoring that there was lots of time already?
  156. dwd We can [re]vote next week regardless.
  157. jonas’ true
  158. jonas’ let us do that then
  159. jonas’ I think we can move on then
  160. jonas’ (I poked Holger)
  161. jonas’ 7) AOB
  162. jonas’ has anyone got any?
  163. Sam I poked editor for a LC on vcard4. Just a heads up.
  164. jonas’ Sam: thx
  165. jonas’ (also for the reminder)
  166. jonas’ alright then
  167. Sam Also I request that council obsolete SOAP over XMPP at their earliest convenience.
  168. jonas’ 8) Ite Meeting Est
  169. jonas’ thanks everyone
  170. dwd Sam, I'm not sure we should, it's still quite important with COVID.
  171. Sam dwd: I'm unsure if that was a joke or if all these aweful contact tracing sites are actually using SOAP :)
  172. daniel i was trying to look up a suitable badum tss gif
  173. Zash Thanks jonas’
  174. jonas’ afk now
  175. dwd It was a joke until you put that thought in my head...
  176. Sam It wouldn't suprise me either way :)
  177. Sam As someone else said when this came up recently, I'm very disapointed in that joke, go wash your mouth out with… some old protocol.
  178. Sam Anyways, jokes aside, please discuss at your earliest convenience. I would like it to not be on the list of XEPs if possible.
  179. dwd Hmmm.
  180. dwd It might actually be useful to have a state other than Deprecated or Obsolete for things like SOAP/XMPP. I mean, ifsomeone actually wanted to do SOAP over XMPP, it's a perfectly good way of doing it, but I agree we don't want it cluttering the list.
  181. Sam Maybe we need a new category for "technically this is still a fine way to do this, but don't do this"
  182. Sam oops, yes, that
  183. dwd Great minds think alike, whilst fools seldom differ, etc.
  184. Sam We could move it to Historical and turn that off by default (if it's on, I forget)
  185. Sam oh wait, that's a category not a state, or something
  186. dwd Historical unfortunate is a track and carries a bunch of other semantics.
  187. Sam I guess some of the historical ones like private XML are actually common and should be on the list too, so nevermind
  188. dwd Yes. "Historical" means "GRandfathered into our standards process from The Great Before"
  189. dwd WHat we want is an "Archived" status, or something.
  190. Sam Maybe just deprecated is fine. No longer in wide use because there are more modern protocols. They don't directly supersede SOAP over XMPP, but as SOAP is more or less superseded it seems like it more or less matches.
  191. Sam "New implementations not encouraged" being the important part
  192. Sam Although having an archive status also sounds good
  193. Holger As for 0227, ejabberd relies on its internal stanza ID format, so supporting MAM import would require adding another column. But I see no way around this.
  194. dwd Holger, On the list, please!
  195. Holger Also, not sure anything should be added to 0227 in order to support MIX roster entries? But maybe not. (Or maybe just a sentence mentioning the issue of MIX and/or generally unsupported childs ...)
  196. Holger Yeah, well, I had seen the posting, figured I have no noteworthy feedback, and now got poked to give it nevertheless :-)
  197. Zash dwd, Sam: Maybe it would be better to put more focus on the compliance suites, rather than getting rid of XEPs with obscure but valid use cases?
  198. dwd That is, also, a reasonable idea.
  199. Sam I do agree we need a better process / more focus on the compliance suites, but I still think having old things like this in the list just looks bad
  200. jonas’ I agree with Zash on that
  201. Sam Although I don't know how we'd add "Archive" at this point. Replace 0001? Can a new XEP modify the procedure w/o being the whole thing again?
  202. jonas’ we can update 1 without replacing
  203. Kev has left
  204. Kev has joined
  205. Kev has left
  206. Kev has joined
  207. Kev has left
  208. Kev has joined
  209. Sam If I'm considering proposing those changes to 0001 anyways, would it make sense to also let you go straight from Final to Obsolete without the awkward "vote to deprecate first"? It makes the graphs easier to draw and it's not as if we don't already do that anyways
  210. Sam That's not true, the graphs are hard to draw either way (or I'm just bad at this). Maybe this isn't a good idea because this state machine is already too complicated.
  211. jonas’ I don't see a problem with the deprecate+obsolete vote, we can do it in one batch
  212. Sam Okay, quick PR submitted anyways to help start discussion.
  213. stpeter Thanks, Sam!
  214. Wojtek has left
  215. Sam I suppose one could argue that this could also just be a website change and doesn't require an XEP change
  216. Sam Ie. there's an archive section you can filter on but its full of final and historical XEPs or whatever state they were in
  217. Sam Just "stuff we don't think is really useful anymore"
  218. Kev You can set such a filter already, I think - but calling it out in a helpful way (possibly a preset) seems useful.
  219. paul has left
  220. paul has joined
  221. debacle has joined
  222. stpeter Having read the scrollback, I do wonder if Deprecated or Obsolete is actually what we want for something like SOAP over XMPP. One hopes that SOAP is obsolete at this point. I'm not sure we need a new Archived state (IMHO developers might not be clear on the difference between Archived and the states we have now).
  223. stpeter But I can reply on the standards@ list if there's a thread (I don't see one at the moment).
  224. Kev > But words of support from the ejabberd folks, and/or Openfire, would be great I’m sure there are other servers too...
  225. stpeter ;-)
  226. Sam I tend to think Obsolete or Deprecate is fine too, but as long as *something* happens to it (and probably others, it just seemed like an uncontrovoersial one to start) I'm happy.
  227. Sam I agree that Archived might just be confusing.
  228. stpeter Now, we do have this thing about moving from Final to Deprecated to Obsolete and perhaps folks don't like the two-step process, but that's how things are defined and it gives developers plenty of warning.
  229. jonas’ yay, back on a real keyboard
  230. jonas’ Sam, so my take on SOAP over XMPP is that even if SOAP is deprecated or whatever, that’s no reason to deprecate that on our side. It is still a valid (albeit probably niche) use case and you can still do it and it doesn’t cause harm to have it specified. Obsoleting or Deprecating it makes no sense to me.
  231. jonas’ Kev, are there other servers which (whose users) are interested in migrating individual users between services? If so, there is a thread on list which went completely silent from those servers ;)
  232. Kev Not individual users, no, but we do support 227 both in and out.
  233. Sam The harm is political, not technical. Everyone thinks XMPP is some dead outdated technology and having "SOAP over XMPP" on the main page you go to when you're trying to figure out what XMPP things to do doesn't help.
  234. Sam But I agree there's no harm in leaving it specified if we could hide it away in the "not actually useful anymore" page somehow.
  235. Kev Although we don’t do the user password bit any more.
  236. jonas’ Sam, if new users go to the full list of XEPs to figure out what to do, that’s really wrong and *that* is what we need to fix
  237. jonas’ Kev, on-list feedback is then surely appreciated
  238. jonas’ (even if it is just "lets do that")
  239. Sam I agree with that too but to a certain extent that's always what people are going to do so we might as well fix both problems.
  240. Kev I think obsoleting SOAP over XMPP is fine, personally. SOAP is obsolete.
  241. Kev May as well just clean up the list.
  242. stpeter +1 to Kev
  243. Kev has left
  244. Kev has joined
  245. marc0s has left
  246. marc0s has joined
  247. marc0s has left
  248. marc0s has joined
  249. debacle has left
  250. debacle has joined
  251. marc0s has left
  252. marc0s has joined
  253. dwd has left
  254. marc0s has left
  255. marc0s has joined
  256. Tobias has left
  257. marc0s has left
  258. marc0s has joined
  259. marc0s has left
  260. marc0s has joined
  261. debacle has left
  262. stpeter has left
  263. stpeter has joined
  264. pprrks has left
  265. pprrks has joined
  266. pprrks has left
  267. pprrks has joined
  268. pprrks has left
  269. pprrks has joined
  270. stpeter has left
  271. stpeter has joined
  272. marc0s has left
  273. marc0s has joined
  274. pprrks has left
  275. pprrks has joined
  276. stpeter has left