XMPP Council - 2023-01-11

  1. Tobias has joined

  2. Tobias has left

  3. marc0s has left

  4. marc0s has joined

  5. vanitasvitae_ has left

  6. gooya has left

  7. marc0s has left

  8. marc0s has joined

  9. Tobias has joined

  10. Tobias has left

  11. marc0s has left

  12. marc0s has joined

  13. Tobias has joined

  14. marc0s has left

  15. marc0s has joined

  16. Tobias has left

  17. Tobias has joined

  18. emus has joined

  19. MSavoritias (fae,ve) has joined

  20. vaulor has left

  21. vaulor has joined

  22. Kev has joined

  23. emus has left

  24. sonny has left

  25. sonny has joined

  26. vaulor has left

  27. vaulor has joined

  28. emus has joined

  29. Wojtek has joined

  30. gooya has joined

  31. Wojtek has left

  32. Wojtek has joined

  33. Wojtek has left

  34. vanitasvitae_ has joined

  35. moparisthebest has left

  36. moparisthebest has joined

  37. SouL has left

  38. SouL has joined

  39. Wojtek has joined

  40. SouL has left

  41. SouL has joined

  42. sonny has left

  43. sonny has joined

  44. Holger has left

  45. Wojtek has left

  46. Wojtek has joined

  47. Holger has joined

  48. SouL has left

  49. SouL has joined

  50. moparisthebest

    Good appropriate-time-of-day!

  51. jonas’


  52. jonas’

    (afternoon here)

  53. daniel

    1) Roll call

  54. moparisthebest


  55. larma


  56. daniel

    is Ge0rG here too?

  57. daniel

    2) Agenda bashing

  58. daniel

    nothing to bash…

  59. daniel

    3) Editors update no updates this week

  60. daniel

    4) Items for voting

  61. daniel

    nothing to vote on

  62. daniel

    5) Pending votes

  63. daniel


  64. daniel

    6) Date of Next

  65. jonas’

    +1w wfm

  66. moparisthebest

    +1w wfm

  67. larma

    +1w wfm

  68. daniel

    +1w wfm (I will be on a train earlier that day; but hopefully home by 1600)

  69. daniel

    7) AOB

  70. moparisthebest

    Here's hoping all the trains in your whole country aren't cancelled due to a computer bug -.-

  71. moparisthebest

    No aob here

  72. larma

    Do we want to issue a last call for XEP-0390 (Entity Capabilities 2.0)?

  73. jonas’

    moparisthebest, here, trains don't get cancelled because of computer bugs. if such a thing were to happen, it would obviously have been russian hackers™

  74. jonas’

    re '390: I have no objections and am willing to work on the document during LC

    ❤️ 1
  75. daniel

    the author can also just ask the editor, no?

  76. daniel

    but I can put it on the agenda for next week

  77. daniel

    i'd be in favor

  78. jonas’

    let me check

  79. jonas’

    > An Experimental (or Deferred) XEP may be proposed to the Approving Body for advancement to Stable (Standards Track XEPs) or Active (Historical, Informational, and Procedural XEPs). This can be requested from the Approving Body on the Standards list by, or in collaboration with, the XEP author.

  80. larma

    > Once the Approving Body so agrees, it shall instruct the XMPP Extensions Editor to (1) change the status of the XEP from Experimental (or Deferred) to Proposed and (2) issue a Last Call for open discussion on the Standards list.

  81. jonas’


  82. jonas’

    so yes we need to vote on it

  83. daniel

    should we vote now?

  84. moparisthebest

    Fine with me

  85. larma


  86. daniel

    ok. your votes please

  87. daniel


  88. larma


  89. moparisthebest


  90. jonas’


  91. jonas’

    I'd like to raise another AOB

  92. vaulor has left

  93. vaulor has joined

  94. daniel

    go ahead jonas’

  95. jonas’

    I think we should avoid voting on things (an LC may not matter much, but other things might) which haven't been announced on the agenda

  96. jonas’

    simply because of transparency

  97. jonas’

    if anyone were to object, they may only learn about it when the vote has passed

  98. jonas’

    which is kind of meh

  99. larma

    Agreed. Blame me for not pushing Daniel to put it on the Agenda after discussing that on xsf@

  100. daniel

    I agree

  101. Ge0rG

    +1 on the 390 LC

  102. moparisthebest

    Things like an LC they still have plenty of time to object, but otherwise I agree

  103. jonas’

    moparisthebest, ack

  104. daniel

    anything else?

  105. pep. has joined

  106. jonas’

    none from me

  107. Ge0rG

    jonas’: given that the agenda usually happens a day in advance, I don't see much of a practical difference

  108. daniel

    a day is a day

  109. jonas’

    I'll notify editors about this request.

  110. jonas’

    Ge0rG, a day is indeed a day, and given that we don't even have minutes...

  111. larma

    I was wondering if we do want to work on a CS 2023 or if we intend to skip this year

  112. jonas’

    things which aren't in the agenda might not make it to the community at all

  113. daniel

    (and if we actually have stuff on the agenda I try to actually send it out 24h prior)

  114. daniel

    larma, personally I don’t think enough has changed to make for a new CS

  115. jonas’

    still having a CS with a current date on it would be good

  116. larma

    I do agree, hence skipping is a viable option. Maybe we can also just rename 2022?

  117. jonas’

    I guess we could do that

  118. Ge0rG

    Should we rename 2022 to 2022+2023

  119. Zash

    CS 2025

  120. moparisthebest


  121. jonas’

    The Eternal Compliance Suite

  122. daniel


  123. Ge0rG

    Or better 2022-2023, that way we can further prolong it

    😄️ 1
  124. jonas’

    in favour of having a document for 2023, by whatever means

  125. jonas’

    any volunteers?

  126. MattJ


  127. Ge0rG

    I don't mind making a full copy of 2022 and bring it up on the list

  128. jonas’


  129. jonas’

    MattJ, care to explain? :)

  130. MattJ

    I'd prefer a new document, but would prefer not to volunteer :)

  131. daniel

    yes Ge0rG thank you

  132. jonas’

    Ge0rG, thanks!

  133. MattJ

    I think there is value in an annual review, and an annual resulting document. I bet there are changes to make (not accusing anyone, but if we make no changes we're probably being collectively lazy)

  134. larma

    Thanks Ge0rG

  135. daniel

    any more aob?

  136. larma

    not from me

  137. jonas’

    none from me

  138. moparisthebest


  139. Ge0rG

    None here, sorry for being late

  140. jonas’

    (FTR, I think that "just copy the previous year and throw it into standards@ for discussion" is a viable approach for what MattJ said)

  141. daniel

    8) Close

  142. moparisthebest

    I agree

  143. jonas’

    thanks daniel

  144. daniel

    thank you all

  145. MattJ

    Yes, I agree. Copy/paste into a new document, update the year, and we'll take it from there

  146. moparisthebest

    Thanks all and especially Ge0rG for volunteering

  147. MattJ


  148. larma

    thanks all

  149. Ge0rG

    I'll also go through the new XEPs of last year and see if I should add them to the suite or to the list of notable things

  150. Tobias has left

  151. Tobias has joined

  152. Tobias has left

  153. Tobias has joined

  154. Tobias has left

  155. Tobias has joined

  156. Tobias has left

  157. Tobias has joined

  158. SouL has left

  159. SouL has joined

  160. Wojtek has left

  161. neox has left

  162. neox has joined

  163. Kev

    Evening folks. It looks like in https://github.com/xsf/xeps/commit/7eaa3962a83ebde2607c0a778cda6281981f8444 19 and 148 were accidentally given minor bumps that should have been editorial bumps. Pep's submitted a PR to undo that, but as that means essentially 'unpublishing' a published revision I'd like Council's opinion on the right way to proceed.

  164. Kev

    (Pep's pointed out, and I agree, that given it's 19 and 148, this is not likely to have any practical issue either way)

  165. vaulor has left

  166. vaulor has joined

  167. Ge0rG

    Is there any problem with keeping the bumped versions?

  168. Wojtek has joined

  169. Kev

    No practical issue.

  170. jonas’

    keep it I'd say

  171. jonas’

    better have minor instead of editorial than the other way around

  172. vaulor has left

  173. Ge0rG

    +1 to that, I don't see any issues with keeping it, but reverting it will probably cause issues

  174. vaulor has joined

  175. sonny has left

  176. sonny has joined

  177. Tobias has left

  178. Tobias has joined

  179. Tobias has left

  180. MSavoritias (fae,ve) has left

  181. Wojtek has left

  182. Kev has left

  183. sonny has left

  184. sonny has joined

  185. vanitasvitae_ has left

  186. vanitasvitae_ has joined

  187. emus has left

  188. Wojtek has joined

  189. Wojtek has left

  190. Tobias has joined

  191. Tobias has left

  192. gooya has left