XMPP Council - 2022-08-10

it's time for my weekly ping-the-council-room-so-it-moves-to-the-top-of-my-chat-lists

blerg

MEETINGS!

It's time

1) roll call

👋️

Hello!

i assume jonas’ is still here from 3 mins ago?

..

yeah more or less

2) Agenda Bashing

knee deep in burning piles of chaos

nothing to bash

3) Editors update none

4) Items for voting - Nothing new this week

5) Pending votes

- Georg on Proposed XMPP Extension: Pubsub Attachments

last chance today

- Everyone on Move XEP-0215: External Service Discovery to stable

+1 on Pubsub Attachments

I kinda sorta voted +1 on XEP-0215 last meeting

I seem to recall to have written something to the list

was there feedback on that?

anyone wants to vote on 215 - the arguments both Zash and MattJ brought up wrt http proxy kinda of convinced me to leave it configurable

not to your email

(sorry, haven't touched my private inbox today yet... still working)

yea I agree, there isn't a major compelling reason to remove the extra stuff, and if people have ideas in mind that's good enough

Ge0rG, yes they were some kind of sort of votes last week but i didn’t record any

but i recorded your +1 now

I'm going to go ahead and vote +1 on 215

HTTP proxies sound good indeed

they are similar enough to STUN/TURN that it makes sense, too

I’m +1 based on that

I also see the issue of push functionality which apparently isn't implemented either

migth want to change that into "authenticated proxy protocol services" ("APPS") eventually, but I'm good with it as-is

+1

larma, didn't someone mention using push?

I believe Zash said he implemented push

i haven’t implemented push but I can sort of see the point. especially once we have http in there

I did, as a prototype, as it would be more standards-compliant than what it was meant to replace.

there is prior art there, I believe 368 was moved to stable when no one had implemented the s2s part, and now people have :/

I mean, it's probably fine to move to stable anyway

stable/draft does not require implementations

moparisthebest, implementations is a condition for Final, not Stable

^5 Zash

yes, but lack of implementations might indicate lack of usefullness, given that most XEPs are experimental for long time

let's not get into that right now

(Experimental explicitly discourages implementations)

discourages *production* implementations

but encourages experimental implementations

> moparisthebest, implementations is a condition for Final, not Stable Would it make sense to change our process to require implementations for Stable?

fair enough

but an experimental push implementation does exist, larma

yes, I noted that

ok

I'm also +1 now knowing that 😉

sorry, I can only pay attention wtih about 20% of my mind here

so I might miss subtext or context on some statements

moparisthebest, do you have a vote too?

daniel, already voted +1 up above yours

as I think I said, the use case for 215-push may be better served by integrating with bind2, but that's not ready yet...

sorry I missed that

np :D

it's recorded now. so let's move on

6) Date of Next

+1w wfm

+1w wfm

+1w wfm

+1w wfm

I'll have to miss next week

Ge0rG, noted

7) AOB

nothing here

FYI, I wrote Dave regarding fallbacks but he was on holiday last week

ok. no other aob I assume

8) Close

thank you all

thanks daniel !

thanks daniel !