XSF Discussion - 2012-03-14

  1. dwd

    Ashley, Afternoon.

  2. Ashley

    hey there!

  3. dwd

    Zash, Reading the history - yeah, I really need to find the time to post about that stuff in a sane way. Maybe even write a XEP or two for the easy bits.

  4. Zash

    k :)

  5. Zash

    I'll look forward to that then

  6. dwd

    bear, About?

  7. Florian

    hello guys!

  8. Florian

    just got home in time :D

  9. dwd

    Florian, Hiya.

  10. dwd

    I think that counts us as quorate. But agenda-less - I've been on the road nearly constantly since last week's meeting, actually.

  11. Florian

    I think one topic is GSoC update ... which should be quite quick

  12. dwd

    Kev, Have you got anything to say on GSoC?

  13. Kev

    We've applied.

  14. Kev

    We should keep improving the ideas list.

  15. Kev

    That's about it right now.

  16. dwd

    Any movement on that since last time?

  17. dwd

    (The ideas list, I mean)

  18. Kev

    We've got a number of ideas there.

  19. Kev

    Peter chased Gajim and got some ideas there (although one's inappropriate).

  20. Florian

    I chased the Tigase guys, but it looks like they won't have any spare ressources to take on mentees

  21. Kev

    The next step, if we're accepted, is to sort out teaser tasks.

  22. Kev

    Current community thought on this is that they're a jolly good thing.

  23. Kev

    (Swift used them last year, after nickingthe idea from other projects in previous years)

  24. dwd

    Should the XSF itself add anything? Like maybe use GSoC resource to make a start on the testing/conformance stuff we've talked about in years past?

  25. stpeter

    I'd be more comfortable with that idea if we had at least something to start from

  26. stpeter

    BTW, I could probably get ISOC funding for that project

  27. dwd

    Ah, that might be interesting. Is there anything else the XSF ought to be doing at this stage?

  28. Kev

    dwd: I don't think so.

  29. stpeter

    dwd: however, again, I'd want to make sure we could follow through on it

  30. Kev

    I don't think we should encourage new projects.

  31. dwd

    stpeter, Yes, quite.

  32. Kev

    If the XSF can't managed to get started on the project itself, it can't effectively mentor it, IMHO.

  33. dwd

    Kev, Seems reasonable.

  34. stpeter nods

  35. dwd

    OK, so I think that covers things for now.

  36. dwd

    Is there anything else people want to discuss?

  37. stpeter

    someone never posted the Brussels report :(

  38. dwd

    Yes, that's true.

  39. stpeter

    have we seen any follow-up on the web/xmpp integration stuff?

  40. dwd

    No, we haven't, and that is mostly my fault - I should write up my thoughts and kick things off.

  41. stpeter

    well, I was thining also of Simon, Sonny Piers on websocket, etc.

  42. stpeter

    I will have time to work on the websocket stuff in April

  43. dwd

    Yes, it's not exclusively my fault...

  44. stpeter

    but those aren't board topics, I suppose

  45. bear gets out of one meeting and....

  46. dwd

    In as much as they spawn from a more general failure to follow through on the SUmmit...

  47. stpeter

    I do think it would be great to get involved with ISOC for various reasons, so perhaps we can brainstorm on the members@ list about possible projects and how to make those happen instead of just talking about them :)

  48. dwd

    stpeter, Yes - how does their funding actually work?

  49. stpeter

    dwd: they have grants of some kind, I've basically been promised money if I can come up with a proposal

  50. dwd

    stpeter, Sounds promising, if a little vague. :-) I'm pretty sure there are things we could be usefully doing if we had the money to promote them.

  51. stpeter edits the FOSDEM 2012 report at xmpp.org

  52. stpeter

    dwd: I can provide more details, but I think the gating factor is the lack of confidence that we can effectively manage such a project since we've not had great success with code projects in the past

  53. dwd

    This is true - solving that problem is probably not very easy as long as we're trying some very grand ideas.

  54. dwd

    (Like an interop test suite that does everything)

  55. stpeter


  56. Kev

    Or anything.

  57. stpeter

    or something :)

  58. dwd

    Maybe a good first step would be to take that server list code that's been kicked about, and gradually add some tests to that.

  59. stpeter

    another thing for me to think about in my Post-IESG Lifeā„¢

  60. stpeter

    what is the server list code?

  61. dwd

    I think it does some basic DNS/SRV tests as it is, and enhancing something is *much* more likely to happen than starting something from scratch.

  62. dwd

    stpeter, That one mentioned on operators@.

  63. stpeter

    ah right

  64. dwd

    But anyway, I think that's something we could discuss elsewhere - anything else we need to discuss here?

  65. stpeter

    I don't have anything else

  66. stpeter

    I need to send out the invoices and receipts, will do that tomorrow

  67. dwd

    OK, so in that case, motion to adjourn [etc].

  68. dwd

    And thanks to those present.

  69. Kev

    Now we see how many Board members are still awake :)

  70. Kev

    Or whether anyone notices if it's me that seconds.

  71. bear seconds

  72. Ashley


  73. Ashley


  74. stpeter finally writes that damn Brussels report

  75. stpeter

    but quickly, I have a lot to finish today before the IESG telechat tomorrow

  76. Zash

    http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2008-March/018186.html Sounds like you mostly just trade bandwith costs for code complexity and local storage costs.

  77. stpeter

    finally: http://xmpp.org/2012/03/fosdem-2012-report/

  78. Zash


  79. ralphm

    Zach: I think the thing is more that council wasn't convinced the gains would be big enough. Also, I think you'd need to have a tight schema for EXI to work efficiently.

  80. ralphm

    Zach: that seems problematic for general XMPP traffic

  81. ralphm


  82. stpeter


  83. ralphm

    Zach left

  84. stpeter

    Zash, that is, yes :)

  85. ralphm

    him too

  86. stpeter

    I've learned more recently that there are two forms of EXI

  87. stpeter


  88. ralphm


  89. stpeter

    one is called something like schema-strict

  90. stpeter

    where you need to know all the schemas ahead of time

  91. stpeter

    which could be a challenge with an extensible payload format :)