XMPP Council - 2022-01-05


  1. pprrks has joined
  2. marc0s has left
  3. marc0s has joined
  4. pprrks has left
  5. debacle has left
  6. paul has joined
  7. paul has left
  8. paul has joined
  9. sonny has left
  10. sonny has joined
  11. SouL has left
  12. sonny has left
  13. marc0s has left
  14. marc0s has joined
  15. pprrks has joined
  16. pprrks has left
  17. pprrks has joined
  18. pprrks has left
  19. pprrks has joined
  20. pprrks has left
  21. pprrks has joined
  22. Sam has left
  23. Sam has joined
  24. SouL has joined
  25. ChronosX88 has left
  26. Tobias has joined
  27. pprrks has left
  28. pprrks has joined
  29. pprrks has left
  30. pprrks has joined
  31. marc0s has left
  32. marc0s has joined
  33. SouL has left
  34. msavoritias has joined
  35. pprrks has left
  36. SouL has joined
  37. pprrks has joined
  38. alex11 has left
  39. mdosch has joined
  40. sonny has joined
  41. moparisthebest has left
  42. sonny has left
  43. sonny has joined
  44. moparisthebest has joined
  45. pprrks has left
  46. pprrks has joined
  47. pprrks has left
  48. pprrks has joined
  49. pprrks has left
  50. pprrks has joined
  51. Kev has joined
  52. ChronosX88 has joined
  53. SouL has left
  54. SouL has joined
  55. debacle has joined
  56. debacle has left
  57. pprrks has left
  58. pprrks has joined
  59. marc0s has left
  60. marc0s has joined
  61. pprrks has left
  62. pprrks has joined
  63. marc0s has left
  64. marc0s has joined
  65. pprrks has left
  66. pprrks has joined
  67. marc0s has left
  68. marc0s has joined
  69. marc0s has left
  70. marc0s has joined
  71. debacle has joined
  72. marc0s has left
  73. marc0s has joined
  74. pprrks has left
  75. pprrks has joined
  76. Wojtek has joined
  77. pprrks has left
  78. pprrks has joined
  79. pprrks has left
  80. pprrks has joined
  81. marc0s has left
  82. marc0s has joined
  83. Wojtek has left
  84. Wojtek has joined
  85. me9 has joined
  86. marc0s has left
  87. marc0s has joined
  88. Wojtek has left
  89. Wojtek has joined
  90. Wojtek has left
  91. Wojtek has joined
  92. marc0s has left
  93. marc0s has joined
  94. ChronosX88 has left
  95. ChronosX88 has joined
  96. marc0s has left
  97. marc0s has joined
  98. Wojtek has left
  99. Wojtek has joined
  100. marc0s has left
  101. marc0s has joined
  102. Wojtek has left
  103. pprrks has left
  104. pprrks has joined
  105. Wojtek has joined
  106. marc0s has left
  107. marc0s has joined
  108. pprrks has left
  109. pprrks has joined
  110. jonas’ 'tis time, isn't it?
  111. daniel Hello everyone. It is time
  112. Ge0rG Happy new year, Council!
  113. daniel 1) Roll coll
  114. larma 👋️
  115. jonas’ Happy new year!
  116. daniel do we have a moparisthebest?
  117. daniel i guess not. anyway let's move on
  118. daniel 2> Agenda bashing
  119. daniel there are some additional changes to the agenda
  120. daniel the editor has published a few new proposals after i sent out the agenda yesterday
  121. jonas’ I'm not sure we need to start voting on those right away
  122. jonas’ nobody has had time to read them anyway and at least one is spinning off into an interesting discussion on-list already
  123. jonas’ (a discussion the outcome of which will decide +1/-1 for me)
  124. daniel i think we can start the voting. i don’t expect people to vote now though
  125. Ge0rG Yay for more discussion
  126. daniel 3) Editors update.
  127. daniel see above
  128. daniel 4) Items for voting
  129. daniel Move XEP-0424 (Message Retraction) to stable
  130. jonas’ I think the points raised on list are sufficient for me to go -1: Depends on a bunch of experimental XEPs the future of which is unclear.
  131. daniel yes i agree with jonas’
  132. daniel and this seems to summarize the list discussion as well
  133. Ge0rG -1, I think we need to sort out the message referencing mechanism first
  134. larma same here (also applies to 425)
  135. Ge0rG 0425 got even more gotchas
  136. daniel I'm -1 here as well
  137. Ge0rG Also I dislike the amount of boilerplate in both
  138. daniel larma, just to confirm that's a -1 for 424?
  139. larma daniel, yes
  140. daniel Ok. Thank you everyone
  141. daniel Move XEP-0425: Message Moderation to stable
  142. daniel -1
  143. Ge0rG -1
  144. jonas’ also -1, same reasoning
  145. larma also -1
  146. daniel alright. thank you
  147. daniel Ok. As I said earlier i'm now gonna start votes on the 4 proposed xeps.
  148. Wojtek has left
  149. daniel personally i'm ready to vote but feel free to say 'on list'
  150. daniel and/or vote next meeting
  151. daniel Proposed XMPP Extension: Compatibility Fallbacks (https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/compatibility-fallback.html)
  152. Wojtek has joined
  153. Ge0rG on-list
  154. larma +1
  155. daniel +1
  156. larma (well, I submitted it, so would be weird to be against)
  157. jonas’ good enough to play with. +1
  158. jonas’ though I note it misses a Requirements section
  159. daniel Proposed XMPP Extension: Call Invites https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/call-invites.html
  160. daniel +1
  161. larma +1
  162. jonas’ looks sensible +1
  163. larma FYI, this will become useful with https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1139/files
  164. jonas’ though one thing which would be useful for readability in that XEP is wording on where to send <left/> to
  165. Ge0rG on-list
  166. larma jonas’, can you mention that on list, so I have a record and don't forget it?
  167. jonas’ will do
  168. larma thx
  169. daniel Proposed XMPP Extension: Message Replies (https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/replies.html)
  170. daniel +1
  171. larma +1
  172. Ge0rG on-list
  173. daniel is this the 3rd or 4th xep dealing with replies? :-)
  174. larma hopefully it's the first to stick
  175. daniel jonas’, ?
  176. jonas’ I was thinking
  177. jonas’ so
  178. jonas’ I'm not sure we should accept this without a Design Considerations section detailing why the other mechanisms are not workable
  179. jonas’ we already have <thread/>, References and Fastening, at the very least.
  180. jonas’ so to me this smells like duplication, about the only reason to reject a protoxep.
  181. jonas’ so to me this smells like duplication, about the only hard reason to reject a protoxep.
  182. jonas’ am I misguided here?
  183. larma None of the ones you mention specifically go for replies
  184. jonas’ well <thread/> kind of does
  185. daniel jonas’, sounds sensible
  186. Ge0rG Yeah, we could resussrect threads indeed.
  187. Ge0rG Yeah, we could resurrect threads indeed.
  188. daniel wouldn’t neceassarily have been a reason for me to reject but i get where you are coming from
  189. larma jonas’, thread allows multiple messages in a thread, business rules in that protoxep specifically says "Answers MUST NOT be be assumed to relate to any other messages than the referenced one."
  190. jonas’ larma, some rationale in the document would be appreciated before acceptance I think.
  191. larma I surely can write it down
  192. jonas’ to me it's not immediately obvious why <thread/> doesn't work here, since a reply could always fork off a fresh thread kind of
  193. larma only if the initial message already had a thread id
  194. daniel it requires the og message to have a thread-id
  195. jonas’ ohh
  196. jonas’ meh
  197. Ge0rG luckily, replies doesn't depend on the original to have an origin-id
  198. daniel i find the thread example not very fitting personally but i do see overlap with references and fastening
  199. larma Overlap in a sense of "points to a previous message in chat"
  200. daniel overlap as in the authors intented this to be used for this
  201. daniel i think
  202. jonas’ oh, message attaching would be another one with overlap
  203. jonas’ so we're at five specs (if we count <thread/>) doing very similar things
  204. larma I don't agree they are "very similar", but I see what you mean. We probably need a section in the protoxep to tell them all apart
  205. jonas’ ok, I'm -0 on this, but this document desperately needs a Design Considerations section to explain why the other four standards are not an option to achieve the goal
  206. daniel ok. thank you
  207. daniel Proposed XMPP Extension: PubSub Namespaces - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/pubsub-ns.html
  208. jonas’ -1, until there's a good explanation for why pubsub#type isn't an option.
  209. Wojtek has left
  210. daniel i don’t know enough about pubsub to make a good call on that
  211. Ge0rG on-list
  212. daniel +/- 0
  213. larma FYI, https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/986 has the explanation
  214. Wojtek has joined
  215. jonas’ should go into the document :)
  216. daniel do you want to cast a vote larma?
  217. daniel or else I would like to move on
  218. larma on-list for now
  219. daniel looking at the time
  220. daniel 5) Pending votes
  221. daniel Everyone but Jonas pending on XEP-0060: Release version 1.23.0 (https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1126)
  222. daniel -1 from me
  223. daniel should go into 0004
  224. daniel and we should ask editor to cherry pick the editorial / non controversial bits from that PR
  225. jonas’ out of curiousity (I don't have any horses in that race), how would a '4 integration look like? sounds tricky to me, considering that '4 is Final.
  226. larma -1 from me as well, although I'm not sure if 0004 is the right place either, but the proposal definitely shouldn't go as is
  227. Ge0rG -1 with the PR as-is, maybe a better non-normative wording can be proposed if we fail to update 0004
  228. daniel jonas’, i think there has been some discussion on how that can still be done in 0004 in a compat way. but i also think a new xep (that modifies 0004) can be done
  229. jonas’ right
  230. Ge0rG Wow, we managed to run over time
  231. daniel yes. but we are mostly done I think
  232. daniel 6) Date of Next
  233. jonas’ +1w wfm
  234. daniel +1w wfm
  235. larma +1w
  236. Ge0rG +1W
  237. daniel 7) AOB either we don’t have any or I need to ask people if they are ok with extending the meeting by 10mins
  238. daniel any aob?
  239. jonas’ none
  240. Wojtek has left
  241. larma no
  242. Ge0rG none
  243. daniel ok. awesome. thank you everyone
  244. daniel 8) close
  245. Ge0rG thanks daniel
  246. jonas’ Thanks daniel!
  247. larma Thanks 🙂
  248. Kev BTW, as References Guy, I don't think References is a reason to block Replies, but agree that some explanation in Replies would be worthwhile.
  249. Zash We need a Venn diagram!
  250. Kev (I do think references would work fine for the use case, but references being stuck (currently?) on URIs makes it a bit unfortunate.)
  251. Kev I think the whole space would greatly benefit from someone with time and understanding trying to map out how all the things work together (and that's the kind of leadership Council's good for), and I think that having a bunch of different ways to reference stanzas is undesirable, but ... yeah.
  252. Ge0rG Isn't that what Summits were good for, before 2020?
  253. Ge0rG searching the wiki for references yields https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Georg%27s_Talk_on_Message_routing among other things.
  254. Kev Summits used to be good for sorting out the high level view, and moderately ok for motivating people to write things, yes. There is a bit of an issue with XEPs written in a hurry to support stuff that was happening/just happened at Summits and then wither on the vine (e.g. References).
  255. Ge0rG I could try to allocate a few hours to write down the principal means we have to reference messages with their pros/cons and to collect an overview of which XEP does what. That's the sort of thing I like delving in, after all. Would wiki format be appropriate, or should I make it another "what's wrong in ..." presentation?
  256. pprrks has left
  257. pprrks has joined
  258. pprrks has left
  259. pprrks has joined
  260. pprrks has left
  261. pprrks has joined
  262. pprrks has left
  263. pprrks has joined
  264. pprrks has left
  265. pprrks has joined
  266. pprrks has left
  267. pprrks has joined
  268. pprrks has left
  269. sonny has left
  270. pprrks has joined
  271. sonny has joined
  272. me9 has left
  273. me9 has joined
  274. pprrks has left
  275. pprrks has joined
  276. debacle has left
  277. pprrks has left
  278. pprrks has joined
  279. pprrks has left
  280. Kev has left
  281. Kev has joined
  282. Kev has left
  283. Kev has joined
  284. Kev has left
  285. Kev has joined
  286. Kev has left
  287. Kev has joined
  288. Tobias has left
  289. sonny has left
  290. sonny has joined
  291. Kev has left
  292. Kev has joined
  293. marc0s has left
  294. marc0s has joined
  295. marc0s has left
  296. marc0s has joined
  297. Kev has left
  298. Kev has joined
  299. debacle has joined
  300. vaulor has left
  301. vaulor has joined
  302. marc0s has left
  303. marc0s has joined
  304. me9 has left
  305. msavoritias has left
  306. sonny has left
  307. sonny has joined
  308. neox has left
  309. neox has joined