XSF Discussion - 2011-09-21

stpeter: XEP-0045 1.25 rc6 is released or not?

Hello.

Hmmm... I am sad. I think I will miss again the meeting. :-(

Damn timezones! I really wanted to come for today's meeting but I have to leave.

Have a nice meeting, all!

thanks, Jehan

Yep stpeter. I was hoping I could participate to the discussion (if any) for my XEP proposal.

But I am currently in Tokyo and a friend is leaving Japan tomorrow. So there is a goodbye party.

Anyway bye.

T-2 minutes?

brb

hi everyone

Board Meeting time, right?

that's my understanding :)

Will, Nyco and Jack missing?

jack is online, let me invite him

just realized, Swift can't invite to MUC?

Kev said he's working on Swift's MUC support :)

:)

he wants the ability to kick people, at least

I'll do invites once Tobias's FT support is integrated.

Don't want to create too many merge conflicts for him.

:)

Agenda: http://typewith.me/xsf

hello all

I like the way you've filled in who's going to be turning up beforehand :D

sometimes direct IM works better than room invites

haha, it was there from the last meeting :)

Saved June 29, 2011

:)

any other topics?

I don't have any other topics

Server Certification - cool topic

the big question is, are we serious about server certification and if so how do we make it happen?

yup

before we can even consider that, we have to have a test suite in place

as I said, probably I can raise some money for this (e.g., to help pay for travel to get the right people in one place), but I think the bigger challenge is to organize and motivate the work

well, I think we should have a spec

i.e. what needs to be tested, what needs to be supported for different certifications

also we would need to discuss if we do levels of certification

right

Perhaps it might be interesting to find some organisation that wants to test server compliance or interop, and find out what their requirements are. Try to build something for them first, and go from there?

Florian: how is that different from http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0302.html and the more detailed features listed in RFC 6120 etc?

PDF has a series of test suites that people can run

i wonder how those are done

it might be useful to look at what other test suites do before embarking on our own

I'm sure somewhere in the bowels of the IETF someone has done certifying

yeah

"Certify" might be a strong term

compliance suite?

(semi-)automated interop testing is probably the right place to start

*nods*

yeah

something along the lines of the W3C Validator

right

that's what I have in mind

looking at XEP-302 ... maybe even add federation to that?

then xsf would need to host the service and allow people to point it at their servers

right

Florian: you might be right that we need a more focused spec that describes the s2s scope more precisly

I think there's much more value in having sometheng people can run themselves off the 'Net.

stpeter: yeah

'Net-based ones are great for devs testing their own systems, but less so for some organisation wanting to validate a bunch of services internally.

hmm, another question is .... do we "certify" server software or server deployments?

So both modes would be ideal.

having a validation service we then could also start advertising the scores/results of people who run against it

bear: indeed

the source for a validation service would allow for in-house use by vendors

right

I think there's two ways of seeing this ...

bear: makes sense

one is to test compliance of a running server (does federation work, valid certs installed....) and the other one is more internal, i.e. does PubSub work the way it's supposed to

I think that most serious XMPP server developers have such test suites internally, the challenge is working on something common for the greater good

for the first one, a W3C online tool would be awesome (target: sysadmins)

stpeter: Knowing your own stuff works, is different from knowing someone else's works, though.

the other one, the target is the server vendors

shit - we changed the time didn't we

Hi Will :)

Will: yeah

:-(

Will: but at least Jack's able to join us at this time :)

so, what have I missed?

so what do you guys think of maybe splitting this up into 2 things ... a test suite for developers, and a test site for deployments/sysadmins

talking about server certification/validation and running it as a system for people to point at their servers

Will: Server Certification

this is planned to be purely functionality based testing, right?

if the tool is written to have suites of tests and to output to a file, then the web service part becomes just an html display of that output

and the file is available for downloading

yeah

Tobias: yes!

Tobias: no scalability testing

stpeter, yeah..there are enough tools for that ;)

right

Tobias: well, we've always avoided scalability testing because there are more variables, set up matters a lot, etc.

stpeter, i know/just getting to know :)

and we're supposed to know something about the protocol :)

hehe

sorry, interruption here, bbiaf

seems that we need to 1) gather up tests that could be in said suite 2) start working on python/lua code to test said items and 3) rinse/repeat

yup

Who's doing the work?

I mention python/lua code as those are common enough languages that have modern xmpp support libs

so you guys don't think there should be 2 seperate projects?

this is something i've always been interested in - I would love to have a chance to work on this

one for deployments a la W3C and one for the actual code?

I think we should start small and simple and iterate

Florian, I think a "Verified by XSF" thing for a particular service seems sensible.

a project like this could get mired down in politics and/or apathy if the goal is too broad

right

back

bear: totally agreed on politics or apathy

as long as we make sure that people don't read "verified" as "approved"

indeed

heck, the first steps would be a spreadsheet of what to test with a column pointing to source snippets on how to test for that

Florian: I think bear is right that the validator would just be a public interface to the verifier

(if that makes sense)

it's how the Atom folks did their service

a test suite that can be driven by a fancier web interface

yeah

yup

probably a good start would be to get a wiki page of what to test and then just announce it to the list and start iterating on that

+1

WFM

having it as a lua and python lib would be a great success

yeah

I'm language agnostic really, just want to use something that will draw in or keep contributors

might be something for the hackfest in February?

Florian: that's the idea, yes

Florian: and I could probably get funding to pay for travel costs of the top contributors :)

:)

I will ask Mozilla to see if they will sponsor me on this

http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Verify

succinct

I liked the short/simple one for Interop

heh

so went with that flavour

I had a good set of talks with the moz folks who are working on backend systems last week

BTW we have an interop@xmpp.org list if we want to use it http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/interop

I think that mailing list would be perfect

+1

this is terribly rude but i have to go in a minute or two, have we decided and is there anything more to discuss?

don't want to spam standards@

Will: I think we're done for now

not rude at all Will - perfectly timed as I think we are close to being done officially

yup :)

so +1 to a verification suite to be driven by XSF?

well, it is kind of cheeky as i forgot to turn up on time :-)

+1

:)

easy enough to set up a separate git repository once we have code

cool

I would love to take point on this along with anyone else

Is that possible? Surely you either take point, or you don't? Otherwise it's not a "point", as such...

I'd be happy to help

bear: I might be able to interest some folks in Cisco to help

and I'll commit to putting time into this, too

dwd: That'd be to 'take blob', wouldn't it?

Or 'take disorganised heap' or such.

Kev, Or "take blunt".

Or that.

maybe I could learn some lua (or re-learn some Python) along the way :)

lol

well, I fubar'd GSoC this season so I want to redeem myself

Kev, But this is a "pointless" discussion.

:P

:p

well done!

ok now :) - we have agreed on that

any further items to discuss?

not from my end

bear: once we have a basic wiki page describing the project, I can send a message to standards@xmpp.org and jdev@jabber.org (plus the members list)

cool

awesome

deadline of next board meeting to have wiki page done?

sounds good

or do you want 2 meetings worth of time?

sure

I think a week is enough

k

at least for the basic description

thanks

bear: we also (still) have xmpp:interop@muc.xmpp.org

Is there a plan for verifying the verifier? Like, having leave to appeal to Council to review any discrepencies, or something?

I think we would have to have the council certify it

indeed

(this also will give the next council something very interesting to look forward to)

I think you'd need to have them on-hand to check results, especially in the case where the verifier complains and the implementor disputes it.

+1

+1

they would be the final authority - because that would also drive changes to the specs

bear, Well, I'm not sure - mostly, it'd probably find bugs in the verifier or its libraries.

bear: yes, I think this will drive some fixes to the specs, better lists of testable features (along the lines of what's in RFC 6120), etc.

dwd: true

:) - I'm being optimistic that the verifier will be perfect!

who's the room owner for interop@muc.xmpp.org?

good question

stpeter, Kev?

stpeter, He more or less ran the last Interop.

Possibly me, I guess.

yeah

Nope.

bear: I've edited the minutes at http://typewith.me/xsf

I think they're good to go now

yep, been watching

heh ok :)

cool - i'll send them out now

thanks!

I'm psyched

thanks

me also - will be a nice fall/winter project

heh ... winterop? ;-)

:D

:)

you and I are heading in opposite directions :)

yea, I'm in very barren lands it seems

Neustradamus: I fixed the "www.xmpp.org" stuff in the XEP Python scripts

stpeter: ok :)

for emails or proposal XEPs ?

Neustradamus: I will soon be AFK for a few hours but I will be back later

it is possible to modify the theme of xmpp.org and jabber.org ?

In the theme folder / misc/nav-posts.php <div class="pagination"> <span class="previous"><?php previous_posts_link(__('&laquo; Previous', 'carrington-blog')) ?></span> <span class="next"><?php next_posts_link(__('Next &raquo;', 'carrington-blog')) ?></span> </div> change to <div class="pagination"> <span class="previous"><?php previous_posts_link(__('&laquo; Next', 'carrington-blog')) ?></span> <span class="next"><?php next_posts_link(__('Previous &raquo;', 'carrington-blog')) ?></span> </div>

stpeter: ok :)

Neustradamus: for inbox proposals, last calls, and deferred specs

:)

Neustradamus: those were the only scripts that still had www

Neustradamus: I think that might be fixed in a more recent version of the theme, so the first step is to upgrade

an example of pages: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/bind.html

the redirection is not updated (not alone)

some of those do not redirect for historical reasons -- we want to keep the old versions online

ah, I see

you see :)

yeah, we can fix that in the lighttpd config

not directly in the page ?

about http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/ -- yes we keep those old versions around (or don't put the time into fixing them)

I found new old addresses: http://www.jabber.org/tmp/ (redirect to http://www.jabber.org/ ?) http://www.jabber.org/muc-logs/ (http://logs.jabber.org/ now?)

ok

no, easier to fix that in the server config -- I don't want to change every one of the old .html files

bbiab

ok

I found a "very" old page: http://www.jabber.org/service-policy/ Personal Eventing Protocol has been removed... Can you add a XMPP URI for jabber@conference.jabber.org ? Change the part with 5223 port... Change "<http://logs.jabber.org/>" to http://logs.jabber.org/ Change "JabberID" to "Jabber ID" Change "policy will be posted at www.jabber.org and" to "policy will be posted at jabber.org and t" (remove www.) In "How to Contact Us" part : there is a link to http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=21 (dead) Update old xmpp.org links to new links On http://www.jabber.org/about/ http://www.jabber.org/index.php/network/ to http://www.jabber.org/network/ http://www.jabber.org/index.php/download-a-client/ to http://www.jabber.org/download-a-client/ Update http://xmpp.org/services/ to http://xmpp.org/resources/public-services/ Update other xmpp.org links on other pages. http://xmpp.org/extensions/all.shtml is dead ?

Kev: http://logs.jabber.org/ it is possible to have same logs for all? old and new?

Neustradamus: why does it matter that we have old links with index.php in them? they redirect just fine!

that's why we set up redirects :)

time for lunch here...

stpeter: ok ok for logs

stpeter: you can close http://tracker.xmpp.org/browse/ITEAM-12 ;)

about logs, there are double... http://logs.jabber.org/ and http://logs.jabber.org/old/ there are same.

and http://logs.jabber.org/new/ too :D

ok

now I really need to be away for a while

Neustradamus: jabber.org is *not* an XSF service, so please post about that in the jabber@conference.jabber.org room

bbl

stpeter: yes

hi

will all validator-relevant stuff be posted on interop@?

astro - most likely yes

and please do poke us if you notice anything not on interop@

great

maybe the node.js xmpp-server is going to be ready for interop testing at next fosdem

sweet!