XMPP Council - 2021-09-22

  1. moparisthebest has left
  2. moparisthebest has joined
  3. SouL has joined
  4. alex11 has left
  5. marc0s has left
  6. marc0s has joined
  7. ChronosX88 has left
  8. me9 has joined
  9. Tobias has joined
  10. me9 has left
  11. takaeshi has joined
  12. takaeshi has left
  13. Kev has left
  14. Kev has joined
  15. Kev has left
  16. Kev has joined
  17. Kev has left
  18. Kev has joined
  19. Kev has left
  20. Kev has joined
  21. Kev has left
  22. Kev has joined
  23. Kev has left
  24. Kev has joined
  25. takaeshi has joined
  26. takaeshi has left
  27. takaeshi has joined
  28. takaeshi has left
  29. debacle has joined
  30. ChronosX88 has joined
  31. takaeshi has joined
  32. Kev has left
  33. Kev has joined
  34. takaeshi has left
  35. alex11 has joined
  36. takaeshi has joined
  37. takaeshi has left
  38. sonny has left
  39. sonny has joined
  40. takaeshi has joined
  41. me9 has joined
  42. alex11 has left
  43. alex11 has joined
  44. Wojtek has joined
  45. Wojtek has left
  46. Wojtek has joined
  47. chronosx88 has left
  48. chronosx88 has joined
  49. alex11 has left
  50. jonas’ 1) Roll Call
  51. takaeshi has left
  52. daniel hi
  53. Zash hello
  54. Ge0rG good morning
  55. ChronosX88 has left
  56. ChronosX88 has joined
  57. jonas’ do we get a dwd
  58. dwd Hiya.
  59. jonas’ \o/
  60. Zash is that full house?
  61. jonas’ full house!
  62. jonas’ 2) Agenda Bashing
  63. jonas’ I was pretty done when I wrote it yesterday. Did I miss anything?
  64. Zash I'm not aware of anything
  65. jonas’ great
  66. jonas’ 3) Editor's Update
  67. jonas’ - Last call for XEP-0459 ended
  68. jonas’ 4) Items for voting
  69. jonas’ 4a) Decide on Advancement of XEP-0459 Title: XMPP Compliance Suites 2022 Abstract: This document defines XMPP application categories for different use cases (Core, Web, IM, and Mobile), and specifies the required XEPs that client and server software needs to implement for compliance with the use cases.
  70. jonas’ I think there was some valuable feedback on-list (and not enough feedback in general. I'd prefer if that feedback was incorporated first and then re-call, I think.
  71. Ge0rG on-list. I really missed the LC and now need to provide some feedback first.
  72. jonas’ that's… not how an LC works normally
  73. jonas’ but I'm glad if we can get more feedback
  74. Ge0rG I'm sorry.
  75. Zash I'm okay with holding out for more feedback.
  76. Zash It's not so different from last years, which was passed, so the silence could also mean lack of controversy.
  77. jonas’ any other voices on this one?
  78. dwd I need some time to properly review, sorry, so on list.
  79. Ge0rG I normally review all the new / significantly changed XEPs for a CS
  80. daniel i'd be ready to give my +1 vote. but i'm also fine holding it another week
  81. jonas’ right
  82. jonas’ then let's do that I guess
  83. jonas’ 4b) PR#1105: XEP-0280: feedback from Last Calls Something about things Georg did.
  84. jonas’ https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1105
  85. jonas’ I have no objections.
  86. Ge0rG I wish for a hand-wave re the text in https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1105/commits/64f87e1d2ac8c60edd1355bc96ecfda25a603fc8
  87. jonas’ enthusiastic +1 for that
  88. Ge0rG +1 obviously
  89. Zash +1
  90. daniel +1
  91. dwd Do we (technically) need to vote on this?
  92. Ge0rG I'm looking especially for feedback from dwd and Kev who are usually good at identifying breaking changes.
  93. Ge0rG dwd: no
  94. dwd I mean, +1 if we do, it looks fine.
  95. jonas’ dwd, Ge0rG wants to avoid this bouncing at council on the next LC iteration
  96. Ge0rG jonas’: another LC?
  97. dwd jonas’, But I think it's my turn to reject '280, isn't it?
  98. jonas’ we're not voting on advancement, are we?
  99. jonas’ dwd, hmm, I think I might be next
  100. dwd jonas’, And no, we don't automatically need a new LC. This is LC feedback, and unless we think it needs another LC, then we vote to advance next.
  101. jonas’ right
  102. jonas’ well then
  103. jonas’ speaking of advancement:
  104. jonas’ 4c) XEP-0313 advancement Maybe not strictly for voting, but we should discuss what the author or editor can do in order to get '313 wrapped up, given the most recent feedback on-list.
  105. dwd So anyway - this PR looks OK to me. But I can't remember why we wanted to strip it originally, and besides it's procedurally an author's to handle.
  106. Ge0rG technically, I'd like to replace the CS link in 0280 to a link to https://xmpp.org/about/compliance-suites-current but that's not rolled out yet?
  107. Ge0rG oh sorry.
  108. jonas’ sorry myself
  109. Ge0rG back to 4b?
  110. Ge0rG or AOB it?
  111. jonas’ Ge0rG, let's finish it now
  112. jonas’ though I have no idea what you're talking about
  113. jonas’ and in any case that URL is more of an iteam matter. we can easily change the link post-advancement
  114. Ge0rG dwd: the stripping was part of the original 0280, and I have no idea why it was there either. But when the stripping was on the sending-server's behalf, the receiving server would still carbon-copy
  115. Ge0rG And then things got changed multiple times in inconsistent fashions
  116. Ge0rG and IIRC it was Kev who suggested that the _receiving_ client should know about attempted routing manipulation by the sender, so not stripping is actually better, security-wise
  117. Ge0rG But given that this whole strip show didn't receive any significant attention over the years, it probably won't bother anyone if I just change the wording
  118. dwd Honestly I think I'd accept pretty much anything to get '280 and '313 over the line.
  119. Ge0rG Great.
  120. jonas’ that's a dangerous thing to say, dwd.
  121. Ge0rG jonas’ the Editor, please merge #1105 then
  122. jonas’ will do at some point
  123. jonas’ alright
  124. jonas’ 4c) XEP-0313 advancement Maybe not strictly for voting, but we should discuss what the author or editor can do in order to get '313 wrapped up, given the most recent feedback on-list.
  125. Zash again?
  126. jonas’ still
  127. jonas’ again
  128. jonas’ I don't know
  129. Zash What's the question?
  130. jonas’ do we get any volunteer who PRs the current on-list favourite proposal (which would be Zashes I think)?
  131. dwd 4c) XEP-0313 advancement Maybe not strictly for voting, but we should discuss what the author or editor can do in order to get '313 wrapped up, given the most recent feedback on-list.
  132. Ge0rG I'm very grateful to Kev about doing the last minute editing work, and I agree with Zash that having a multi-list is less inelegant
  133. Ge0rG Also a vague reminder about the dozen or so of issues in 0313 that I promised not to block advancement on, but are still important to resolve.
  134. dwd You know that never ending staircase by MC Escher? I'm pretty sure the tower there has a small note saying "Discussion on advancing XEP-0280 and XEP-0313".
  135. jonas’ Zash, would you be up for PR-ifying your suggestion?
  136. Zash With what deadline?
  137. Ge0rG Also I'm still looking forward to hear detailed responses on how to treat type=groupchat from MAM in a client
  138. jonas’ Zash, next week?
  139. jonas’ next tuesday noon ideally
  140. jonas’ Ge0rG, suggest the user to pick another server? ;)
  141. daniel Ge0rG, https://github.com/iNPUTmice/Conversations/blob/master/src/main/java/eu/siacs/conversations/parser/MessageParser.java#L431-L433
  142. jonas’ or that, yes
  143. Zash I can attempt but my confidence in my XEP writing ability is low.
  144. daniel unless you do muc/sub or something
  145. Ge0rG daniel: well, my question was about having groupchat-in-MAM as a useful thing.
  146. daniel but if you do muc/sub you probably know
  147. Ge0rG these questions: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2021-September/038560.html
  148. daniel haven’t we been over that a bunch of times?
  149. takaeshi has joined
  150. jonas’ my answers would be: intermixed, not at all, "in some way based on the stanza Id of the MUC", no idae
  151. jonas’ Zash, thanks
  152. jonas’ let's move on
  153. jonas’ 5) Date of Next
  154. jonas’ +1w wfm
  155. dwd +1w wfm
  156. dwd Oh, I may have some AOB.
  157. Zash +604800s wfm
  158. daniel +1w wfm
  159. Ge0rG +1W WFM
  160. jonas’ great
  161. jonas’ 6) AOB
  162. jonas’ anything?
  163. dwd So, I think our term is ending relatively soon, isn't it?
  164. jonas’ early November
  165. dwd Alex has asked me to get around to fixing the Memberbot, so I assume so.
  166. dwd In which case we should probably:
  167. Ge0rG 2021-11-25 is the date
  168. dwd a) Plan the remainder of our workload to wrap things up.
  169. dwd b) Decide if we're standing once again.
  170. dwd And optionally, (c) go recruit interesting people to stand.
  171. Kev (I was on leave last week, BTW, I intend responding to Zash’s mail on 313 soon, although my response is, I think, that it looks elegant at first glance but that the discovery becomes horrid and I think we’re better off with my PR even if it’s not perfect.)
  172. jonas’ (a) I think we're well on track there right now: We're trying to wrap up '280, '313 and push the CS far enough that they get advanced in our term or at least next council can easily advancet hem
  173. jonas’ (b) Yes, though I'm not sure if I'm up for chairing next term. It's been a bit more draining this year and I might prefer a break.
  174. takaeshi has left
  175. jonas’ (c) Probably a good idea. I'll keep my eyes open.
  176. dwd (b) Oh dear.
  177. dwd [That was all from me anyway]
  178. Zash noted
  179. jonas’ alright
  180. Zash Kev, looking forward to your elaboration email on that then 🙂
  181. jonas’ I anticipated more discussion toward (a), but there seems to be none.
  182. Zash jonas’, I think you about covered it.
  183. jonas’ Thanks for the pointer Kev, I'm looking forward to the list discussion, too :)
  184. jonas’ 7) Ite Meeting Est
  185. jonas’ Thanks everyone.
  186. Ge0rG Thanks jonas’
  187. Ge0rG jonas’: you've been doing a great job as chair, BTW
  188. dwd jonas’, I think we would have discussed plans were we not all terrified at the thought of you not chairing anymore.
  189. jonas’ :D
  190. jonas’ Ge0rG, thanks
  191. pprrks has left
  192. pprrks has joined
  193. pprrks has left
  194. pprrks has joined
  195. takaeshi has joined
  196. debacle has left
  197. takaeshi has left
  198. takaeshi has joined
  199. takaeshi has left
  200. takaeshi has joined
  201. me9 has left
  202. me9 has joined
  203. me9 has left
  204. me9 has joined
  205. takaeshi has left
  206. takaeshi has joined
  207. chronosx88 has left
  208. ChronosX88 has left
  209. takaeshi has left
  210. ChronosX88 has joined
  211. takaeshi has joined
  212. sonny has left
  213. sonny has joined
  214. Wojtek has left
  215. me9 has left
  216. takaeshi has left
  217. takaeshi has joined
  218. Tobias has left
  219. Kev has left
  220. Kev has joined
  221. takaeshi has left
  222. debacle has joined
  223. marc0s has left
  224. marc0s has joined
  225. pprrks has left
  226. SouL has left
  227. debacle has left
  228. alex11 has joined
  229. sonny has left
  230. sonny has joined
  231. pprrks has joined
  232. marc0s has left
  233. marc0s has joined