XMPP Council - 2021-09-01

  1. jonas’

    1) Roll Call

  2. Zash

    But, pancakes?

  3. jonas’

    sorry, no pancakes

  4. jonas’

    I just have waffles

  5. Zash is here, without pancakes

  6. jonas’

    and the waffles are for breakfast

  7. jonas’

    so I'm also here without either pancakes or waffles

  8. jonas’

    do we get a dwd maybe?

  9. jonas’

    and/or a Ge0rG?

  10. Zash

    At least I have coffee, unlike yesterday and this morning.

  11. jonas’

    that's a start I suppose

  12. jonas’

    I had tea, which was also nice

  13. Ge0rG

    Is it this time of the week again?

  14. jonas’

    Ge0rG, it is )

  15. jonas’

    Ge0rG, it is :)

  16. Ge0rG

    I had more than sufficient amount of coffee today.

  17. Ge0rG

    Well, still not enough to compensate for the lack of sleep.

  18. jonas’

    Ge0rG, your typing is surprisingly coherent for that

  19. jonas’


  20. Zash

    (3 or 4)/5

  21. jonas’

    well, let's get started

  22. jonas’

    2) Agenda Bashing

  23. jonas’

    it was a surprisingly on-time agenda

  24. Ge0rG

    I like this kind of agendas.

  25. jonas’

    3) Editor's Update

  26. Ge0rG

    Not only on time, but also without additional workloads.

  27. jonas’

    Draft is the new Stable

  28. jonas’

    4) Items for voting None.

  29. jonas’

    5) Pending Votes - Dave on PR#1096 (XEP-0060: remove exception for last item when purging a node)

  30. Ge0rG

    Stable is the new Draft?

  31. dwd

    Hiya, sorry I'm late.

  32. jonas’

    Ge0rG, right

  33. jonas’

    dwd, you're right on time to cast your vote :)

  34. dwd


  35. Ge0rG

    And there was sufficiently little discussion of which color the stable should have.

  36. jonas’

    dwd, thanks!

  37. jonas’

    6) Date of Next

  38. Ge0rG

    +1W WFM

  39. jonas’

    I might not make +1w

  40. Zash

    +7d wfm

  41. jonas’

    as it is the anniversary of my nickname change, and that needs to be celebrated accordingly

  42. jonas’

    so it'd be good if someone could chair in my stead

  43. jonas’

    I'll prepare an agenda though

  44. jonas’

    any volunteers?

  45. Ge0rG

  46. jonas’

    perfect, you got the job

  47. jonas’

    dwd, +1w wfy?

  48. dwd


  49. jonas’


  50. jonas’

    7) AOB

  51. jonas’

    anyone got any?

  52. Ge0rG


  53. jonas’

    Ge0rG, go ahead :)

  54. Ge0rG

    Two, actually.

  55. jonas’

    you can have two, even

  56. jonas’


  57. Ge0rG

    7a) Membership Reapplication: it's affecting two Council members. We should ensure that nobody is losing membership and puts Council into limbo

  58. jonas’

    good point

  59. Sam

    Ge0rG: council people don't need to be members, iirc

  60. jonas’

    the two affected being you and Zash if I see it correctly

  61. jonas’

    Sam, you're confusing that with Board

  62. jonas’

    Council needs membership

  63. Ge0rG

    7b) Board and Council elections. Autumn has started. That means that some time soon there will be an election of the next Council.

  64. Ge0rG

    We should conclude all LCs prior to that.

  65. Zash

    Time to review our yearly goals?

  66. Ge0rG

    I'm _especially_ looking into the direction of CS-2021

  67. Ge0rG

    I'm _especially_ looking into the direction of CS-2022

  68. jonas’

    Sam, bylaws: > All the individuals elected to participate on the XMPP Council must be Members of the Corporation.

  69. Sam

    oh wait, or is that board? yah, that still makes no sense and I mix it up every time. nevermind then.

  70. jonas’

    Ge0rG, do you have any contact with the CS-2022 author?

  71. Ge0rG

    But I'm also looking into the general direction of XEP-0280, which got some LC feedback that still needs to be incorporated by its new owner, who is very much ashamed of the delay.

  72. Zash

    You could probably read it as needing to be a member at the time of election...

  73. Ge0rG

    jonas’: no

  74. jonas’

    there are two options: either we have no open LCs or find-lcs.sh is broken.

  75. jonas’

    ag also doesn't find anything

  76. jonas’

    I think we actually don't have any open LCs.

  77. jonas’

    Zash, next sentence goes on with "If a Council member resigns his or her membership in the Corporation, is removed from membership in the Corporation, or is terminated from membership in the Corporation, he or she shall thereby relinquish all rights and responsibilities as a member of the Council."

  78. jonas’

    Ge0rG, mmmkay

  79. Ge0rG

    jonas’: I was looking into the direction of: - LCs that we performed that need an update of the document - LCs that we should perform before the New Council is elected

  80. Sam

    That makes sense I guess

  81. jonas’

    Ge0rG, understood

  82. jonas’

    soo... do you have any specific LCs in mind which we should start in this term, except CS-2022?

  83. Ge0rG

    maybe we can find a volunteer to look into what Council has achieved in this year and what should still be followed upon

  84. jonas’

    those which are pending on incorporation of feedback seem outside our control, right?

  85. Ge0rG

    jonas’: 0280

  86. jonas’

    that's one of those, isn't it?

  87. Ge0rG

    jonas’: well, it might be a good idea to ping the responsible persons

  88. jonas’

    like... you?

  89. Ge0rG

    I'm trying to generalize here.

  90. jonas’

    MAM (313) is another one

  91. jonas’

    but I think it suffers from the same issue as 280

  92. Ge0rG

    For 0280 I'm very sure that some public pressure can resolve the situation.

  93. jonas’

    so the only things we LC'd and did not advance this term are '280 and '313

  94. Ge0rG

    And I think that we provided some useful feedback for both, making it possible to advance them with just minor updates?

  95. jonas’

    Ge0rG, WheRE Is ThE F*CkInG UpDAtE, LeBowSKi?!

  96. Ge0rG

    So it would make sense to complete the process in this term?

  97. jonas’

    Ge0rG, I don't think "factor out all the rules in a separate document" is a minor update?

  98. Ge0rG

    jonas’: using a text editor that's capable of copy&paste, why not?

  99. jonas’

    I think your '313 feedback was more than two pages long

  100. jonas’

    it doesn't feel like minor update

  101. Ge0rG


  102. jonas’

    if you think there is a minor update possibe, it would be best if *you* did that

  103. jonas’

    or at least proposed wording

  104. jonas’

    as you seem to have the tightest grasp of the *problems*, at least

  105. Ge0rG

    jonas’: I didn't manage to complete the minor update of my own XEP yet.

  106. jonas’

    I wonder if it's possible to tackle both at the same time?

  107. Ge0rG

    It's been long enough that I need to read up my own comments on-list anyway.

  108. jonas’

    alternatively, we could agree that the rules as is work good enough and additional improvements should focus on fleshing out IM-NG.

  109. jonas’

    alternatively, we could agree that the rules as is work well enough and additional improvements should focus on fleshing out IM-NG.

  110. dwd

    It seems to me that our inability to get '280 and '313 over the line is just silly, at this point.

  111. jonas’

    dwd, agreed

  112. dwd

    I mean, virtually everyone uses them just fine, whether or not the rules are perfect.

  113. jonas’

    I mean at the same time it points at the fundamental issue that message routing is hard

  114. jonas’

    especially in a system which has grown historically over 20 years

  115. dwd


  116. Zash

    So, declare the rules to be out of scope, move on with life?

  117. jonas’

    which is why I think that we should keep the things as is as Stable and head toward IM-NG

  118. Zash

    And figure out routing (including copying and archiving) rules elsewhere

  119. dwd

    I think IM-NG will be a useful sponge to soak up this energy, but yes.

  120. jonas’

    as Editor, I.m re

  121. jonas’

    as Editor, I'm reluctant to issue another LC for either '280 or '313 because it means a lot of process for little gain.

  122. jonas’

    so I'd like to hear *at least* from council that another LC iteration would likely pass the vote, barring any substantial new blocking list feedback

  123. Zash

    YOLO just make them Draf^W Stable already!!11 /half-serious

  124. Zash

    They definitely have enough deployment to warrant it

  125. jonas’

    for sure

  126. Ge0rG

    I think I split my feedback on '313 into what would make vote -1 and what would not

  127. dwd

    Zash, I am entirely serious. If there's no energy to change them and plenty of deployment, that suggests Stable to me.

  128. jonas’

    and even if we were to change them, we would do so so carefully as if they were Stable, even though they have the Experimental label on them

  129. dwd

    Well, quite. They're de-facto Stable.

  130. jonas’

    Ge0rG, soo... actually

  131. dwd

    I mean, I argued this something like 3 years ago.

  132. jonas’

    Ge0rG, either your -1 feedback can be fixed in Stable, or it can not be fixed in Stable because it is too breaking, in which case it is unlikely to see any deployment anyway.

  133. jonas’

    Ge0rG, please meditate over this until next week, I might put "advance '313" on the agenda.

  134. jonas’

    (as it hasn't seen any changes since the last LC, I think we can just do that)

  135. MattJ


  136. dwd

    jonas’, On related "we should advance this", '368 to Final?

  137. jonas’

    dwd, could

  138. dwd

    jonas’, Though that's a purely Editor concern to begin with.

  139. jonas’

    yeah, but the editor needs ideas :)

  140. jonas’

    I'll send it to the editor team to consider

  141. Zash

    Anything referenced by the CS should probably be Stable

  142. dwd

    jonas’, Well, when you see him...

  143. dwd

    Zash, +1

  144. jonas’

    alright, your AOB cleared to your satisfaction, Ge0rG?

  145. Ge0rG

    Zash: anything *required* by the CS. But I think not even that is true.

  146. Ge0rG

    jonas’: to a point where no further discussion is useful, at least

  147. jonas’

    well, fair enough

  148. jonas’

    any other AOB?

  149. Zash

    CS dependency requirements would be a different topic... for another time perhaps.

  150. jonas’

    yes, I suppose

  151. jonas’

    alright then

  152. jonas’

    8) Ite Meeting Est

  153. jonas’

    thanks everyone

  154. dwd

    Thanks, jonas’

  155. Zash

    thanks jonas’

  156. Zash

    pancakes now?

  157. Zash

    Go now, and rest^W make pancakes. You've earned it!

  158. Ge0rG

    Thanks jonas’

  159. jonas’

    dinner's going to be paste with a cheese sauce, so that's good enough

  160. Ge0rG

    Cheese Pasta?

  161. jonas’


  162. Ge0rG

    I hope this doesn't lead into #pastagate

  163. jonas’

    why should it?