XMPP Council - 2023-11-15

Hi

Hi.

It's time.

1) Roll call

👋️

o/

I know that moparisthebest is unavailable but do we have Ge0rG?

2) Agenda bashing

nothing to bash

3) Editors update

none

4) Items for voting

none

5) Pending votes

we have a few

best to look at the spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Zp5FWJI0aubAL29LhrXkhc-MrZauJ1mtkVnm5TrtwLo/edit#gid=0 but everyone is pending on the new inbox xeps

Ge0rG, jonas’ and me are pending on PR 1293

and jonas’ is pending on everything from last week

anyone ready to vote now? otherwise just ping me over the week in here

(or send an email in reply to last weeks agenda)

I am confused about pr#1293

oh, I missed #1293

Did I do a stupid?

the remark says it removes something, but i cannot see that it actually removes that; in addition, what the remark claims to remove makes no sense to me.

I think the overall change makes sense, but the remark confuses the heck out of me

could the editor maybe reword that to more accurately reflect the change or tell me how I am misreading it? :)

I'm confused by it in similar ways

If the change isn't good, I'll kick it back to the author.

Kev, the change is good IMO, just the remark is not.

daniel, regarding the online meetings protoxep, I see some overlap with '215, but that's no blocker for me today. +1 on XEP-XXXX: HTTP Online Meetings

+1 from me as well

+1 on PR#1292 (the roominfo_changesubject thing)

Ge0rG, on the online meetings?

+1 on PR#1278, noting that this seems worthy of a minor, not a patch-level, version bump

daniel: yes

+1 on PR#1265

I'm very confused by the AI XEP submission though. Is it supposed to be the exclusive way to talk to AI bots? If not, does it warrant a dedicated syntax that is a MUST?

Ge0rG, I was pondering the same. Different models would probably be better represented by different accounts.

in particular because there is no discovery of models included

and one probably cannot assume that any given service supports arbitrary models ✏

Yeah, and nothing prevents you from sending data forms

a good changelog for the pubsub one would just be "<li>Add examples for publishing item without ID</li>", no?

this seems incomplete, but that isn't a blocker for experimental IMO

daniel, s/li>/p>/g, but otherwise it sounds good. ✏

actually, this should probably include a disco identity for AI

do away with the <ai/> element

but leave the form stuff in

daniel: +1 for the changelog text

jonas’: yeah, and how is an AI different from a bot?

but these are just suggestions, I'm not going to ruin the party on my way out, even though I have strong opinions about "AI" in general.

+1 from me for the HTTP Online meetings (I will send some feedback to the author on the list later)

I'm +0 on the AI submission due to that. Mostly because I don't get the rationale from the XEP

This, to me, feels like a person not familiar with XMPP, and who could do with some guidance (probably from Council) on how to write an XMPP-ish proposal. Whether that's before or after acceptance.

I'm also +0 on AI

Kev: that's an excellent summary of the situation

+0 on AI, I'll send some notes to the list

But we don't have an author relations department

this means we don’t accept it if 3 people are not +1

daniel: is that a bad thing?

that we don’t accept this? no I just wanted to point this out

hmpf

I think not accepting it kind of sucks

because a single 0 doesn’t influence stuff

but 3 do

so I'm going to flip to +1 here, begrudgingly (as an "AI"-hater) ✏

to not discourage the contributor from developing this further in our awesome ecosystem.

any more votes?

I kind of get that we all agree that this is not really good for publication but we also don't want to reject a new contributor

In an ideal world, somebody would reach out and interactively help the author iterate

Get the author onto the mailing list or in the xsf@ chat?

I’ll read the xep and try to reach out to the author

I guess this means additional votes for now?

I already have a mail drafted

which I'm going to send to standards@ with the author in CC

jonas’, sounds good

thanks

basically containing the points: use disco identities, use a 128 extension for further info, get rid of <ai/>, keep using the embedded form, use multiple accounts unless a good use case for multi-modle accounts emerges, then use forms to select the model.

what is our status, are we accepting?

IMO, the best way to deal with a new person you want to encourage is to engage with them about how to do good work, rather than accepting something you believe to be unsuitable.

Kev, are you volunteering? :-)

also, Experimental is just for that phase, isn't it?

jonas’, we are still missing 2 votes

so we don’t know yet

I mean this work isn't bad, it just needs more tender love & care, so I'm fine with accepting on a formal level.

And if you believe that it's not subpar and just needs some TLC, Experimental seems like the right place for it to be.

ok. I would like to move on for now

6) Date of Next

+1w wfm

+1w wfm, but I'll be in vacation mode and may miss it.

+1w wfm

will there be a next time? when are the elections?

+1w wfm

next meeting is on the 22nd. elections are on the 23rd

awesome.

7) AOB

From the peanut gallery, I'll probably not be at the next meeting to say it, so thanks to Council for their efforts this term.

thanks for the community's trust :)

thanks Kev

also thank you for doing the editor stuff

8) Close

Thank you all. see you next week