XSF Discussion - 2012-03-14

Ashley, Afternoon.

hey there!

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.

k :)

I'll look forward to that then

bear, About?

hello guys!

just got home in time :D

Florian, Hiya.

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

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

Kev, Have you got anything to say on GSoC?

We've applied.

We should keep improving the ideas list.

That's about it right now.

Any movement on that since last time?

(The ideas list, I mean)

We've got a number of ideas there.

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

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

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

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

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

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?

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

BTW, I could probably get ISOC funding for that project

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

dwd: I don't think so.

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

I don't think we should encourage new projects.

stpeter, Yes, quite.

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

Kev, Seems reasonable.

OK, so I think that covers things for now.

Is there anything else people want to discuss?

someone never posted the Brussels report :(

Yes, that's true.

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

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

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

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

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

but those aren't board topics, I suppose

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

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 :)

stpeter, Yes - how does their funding actually work?

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

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.

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

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

(Like an interop test suite that does everything)

nod

Or anything.

or something :)

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.

another thing for me to think about in my Post-IESG Life™

what is the server list code?

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.

stpeter, That one mentioned on operators@.

ah right

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

I don't have anything else

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

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

And thanks to those present.

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

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

thirds!

:D

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

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.

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

\o/

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.

Zach: that seems problematic for general XMPP traffic

oh

heh

Zach left

Zash, that is, yes :)

him too

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

heh

oh

one is called something like schema-strict

where you need to know all the schemas ahead of time

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