XSF Discussion - 2013-11-21

  1. fippo

    the problem about google is not adding a gmail exception

  2. fippo

    it's having to add a hosted-on-google-apps exception

  3. fippo

    so that would be an exception for anything whose srv records points to xmpp-server.l.google.com. or any of it's 1.l, 2.l, 3.l or 4.l cousins

  4. ralphm

    fippo: indeed

  5. Lloyd

    How people see XMPP when they look at the server list on the xmpp.org site: https://twitter.com/bobpoekert/status/403302786747486209

  6. Kev

    If having implementations in many languages is 'crusty', it's not clear to me that crusty is a bad thing.

  7. Kev

    The list of dead servers is another matter.

  8. Lloyd

    Have you read the replies? A comment that came up in Portland, many in the list aren't actively developed..

  9. Lloyd

    …what you just said :)

  10. Kev

    A policy of "Need to rerequest to be added each year" might cause some of the abandoned things to drop off.

  11. Lloyd

    Was just thinking about that. Problem is that it increases admin effort (albeit a small amount) and do we prod projects or do they have to come to us? (I know my answer there).

  12. MattJ

    Date of last release as a column? Automate it somehow?

  13. MattJ thinks aloud

  14. Kev

    MattJ: I'm not sure 'date of last release' is as good a metric as 'authors are prepared to relist'.

  15. MattJ

    Last release >1y, project is not active?

  16. Kev

    I don't think that's true.

  17. Kev

    Or, at least "Getting new stuff added" isn't terribly important, "authors are still looking after it" is.

  18. Lloyd

    agreed. If there's someone willing to put the effort in to get their server relisted you can be fairly sure the project is active.