XSF Discussion - 2014-01-28

Estos are sponsoring the dinner too, for €111.11 - amusingly, they stipulated it was base 10.

Yay ESTOS

Would've been €7,75 if in base 2.

now you're confusing even me (-:

I have to admit I'm pretty impressed that intosi can translate non-integer binary to decimal.

Although naturally, it's wrong. Surely that's exponent and mantissa?

Nah, just regular fractions. So, it's 2^2 + 2^1 + 2^0 + 2^-1 + 2^-2.

Same as in any other base n, say n=10 ;)

If you know chmod, you know that 111 = 7

I don't think that's the part that impressed dwd ;)

intosi, I do know that given any base n, a number is divisible by (n-1) is the digits add up (recursively) to (n-1).

intosi, So in hex, for example, 1E is divisible by F because 1+E is F. This being the same thing that 18 decimal is divisible by 9 (1+8).

intosi, It's less impressive in binary, though.

Yeah, binary is easy, especially when going from binary to decimal.

I note that the reason I didn't reply to the Editor thread was because telling myself I was happy to help seemed pointless, rather than that I wasn't intending to.

Although it's just about possible that I'd count as a usual suspect in some respect.

It's just about possible that a Council Chair who also serves on the Infrastructure Team and additionally has performed tasks like GSoC Org Admin might possibly count as a usual suspect, yes.

But actually, I don't think it's quite right for Council people to be on the Editorial team. I'm not even sure it's right that Board people should be.

that depends on the job description of the editorial team actually. responding to bug reports, preparing small fixes and comitting them after huting down someone to review them isn't something i'd specifically volunteer for ;-)

because i do that anyway.

Draft everyone who ever complained about the XEP editor being slow? :)

I think the bigger point is that it *should* bloody well be *other* people than those already doing things.

ralphm, Right.

ralphm, In part.

ralphm, For Council, the problem is that the Council is the body that decides what appropriate changes are. I can see a degree of conflict of interest if they're also the same people making the changes.

dwd: depends... for typos the council is not needed imo.

ralphm, You'd potentially end up with a self-determining group; a spontaneous cell, if you will. Those are, I'm told, bad things.

fippo, Right, this is true. Nor are small grammatical edits. And the Council in effect decides where the line is.

well, there are people currently in this room who are not board/officer/council/infra

Zash, I would point out that being on the XEP Editorial team would be something you could stick on a CV. And I'd hope it'd be less than an hour a week. So why hide?

Well, I don't want to hide here, and I take the rant of dwd at heart. But I do hesitate to take up a position in the editorial team. Right now I am already dissatisfied with the the too little amount of time put in the obligations I took upon me for the XSF. Taking up more obligations feels a bit the wrong way around. But I do think it is an important position and I do think, if I invest enough time, I will be able to do a decent enough job as member of the editorial team. So if we can share the workload enough within the team, I put up my hand right here and right now.

winfried, The rant wasn't aimed at you, or Zash, or anyone else here, really.

winfried, It's aimed at the ~60% of our membership who do literally nothing beyond reapply.

winfried, But FWIW, I think your recent BOSH work clearly shows you'd do an excellent job, probably far more than is actually needed. The bulk of what's needed is to keep on top of the actions required by the Council's decisions, and to get XEP submissions into the system smoothly.

thanks for the kind words, dwd, but still I feel my commitment to the XSF is bigger then what I am doing right now. So if the rant was aimed at me or not, I do take it at heart

So you can put my name on the list, hoping enough people step up, so the load can be shared.

winfried, One of the problems of writing something like that rant is that the people who take it personally are usually the people who shouldn't. Like you, they do so because they're aware of their responsibilities - I'd love you to get onto the Editorial team, because you'd do a great job, and be very dedicated - but you already do plenty.

phew. webrtc status update slides for the summit done

Great! Looking forward to those...

dwd: People making substantive edits are the authors, not the XEP Editor

dwd: Having Council able to fix typos, add in wording etc. seems fine.

It is Council, after all, who are able to block or remove specs if they don't like them anyway.

If someone on the editor team was to start making wholesale changes to a XEP then we have problems whether they're Council or not.

That is: This is not the review team.

Kev, Yes, I agree, but I still feel as if the two areas would be better kept apart.

Kev, If for no other reason than COuncil has plenty to do anyway.

I don't see a problem here, FWIW. I /do/ see problems with people on both Board and Council, but both Council and Editors don't seem bad.

I think it's roughly the same issue; that of oversight of oneself.

Trias politica? Editors = police, Council = judges, Board = Government?

:-D

That would make anyone on both Council and Editors be Judge Dredd.

Or any body on the council and board Putin ;-P

"I am the Law!"

dwd: I don't see how.

Editor isn't making substantive decisions.

Council is making substantive decisions.

Kev, RIght, and Council decide what is substantive.

Someone who was both doesn't gain any additional power that they don't already have.

It seems like you're complaining that Council have too much power over the process, rather than that the XEP Editors shouldn't be on Council.

No, I'm not complaining about the status quo. I'm suggesting that having someone be both performing and authorizing the changes is unnerving to me.

think the discussion is more or less if the council decides and the editors execute the decisions or if the editors take (some) decisions themselves and the council overviews the work of the editors

in the first case there is no problem, in the second case there is

dwd: But the changes the Editors can make are trivial, and the changes the author can make are wholesale - and we have no problem with authors being on Council.

Kev, Yes, this is true. For that matter, Peter was on Council for many years prior to your successful coup d'étât. :-)

kev but it is up to the council to decide when a change in trivial...

Kev, But that doesn't convince me of anything much other than I'll be in the rough on this one, more than likely.

For the 'editor goes rogue and is on Council' problem you need the whole Council to go rogue. And if that happens, the Editor part is immaterial.

Because if Council wants to make wholesale changes to a XEP then can get rid of the old one, and publish their own, without looking at the Editors at all.

And then Council would get ejected, and a new one would be put in place by the membership that would undo this.

We'd hope.

But in any case, we'll cross the Editor-on-Council bridge when we come to it; we might get enough volunteers as to make it irrelevant.

But excluding anyone who has ever served as an Editor from being on Council seems entirely pointless.

who has technical access to the system publishing XEPS?

No, certainly. But there's a world of difference between my statement that "it's not quite right" to serve on both simultaneously, and extrapolating from that a blanket life ban on anyone serving in one to stand for the other. :-)

Iteam plus anyone Peter decides to give it to.

(and now I have to go for the remainder of the day)

Kev, Presumably the Editorial team would be running that.

dwd: Well, either you think it's OK for someone to make changes as Editor and then vote on them as Council, or you don't.

dwd: Yes, presumably so in the New Order

Kev, I think it'd be preferable to avoid it. I think you're implying a binary choice in my position that's not present.

Oh, I missed a rant and a discussion

The main reason I hadn't spoken up was because I wasn't sure it was right to be editing and approving

I'm not sure it isn't, mind

Given that, as someone pointed out, the editorial work is mostly minor, I'm not sure I see a problem with it

I'm not sure it's *wrong* as such. I merely said it's "not quite right", and "unnerving".

Other than the fact that it shouldn't be necessary

And that, too. If we have to due to lack of alternative suitable volunteers, then we have more problems than that.

So, if we still don't have enough hands in a few days, count me in

But I won't post that to the list :)

Can I just check for sanity, this is technical editorial not wordsmithery (you know what I mean)?

XEP Editors? No, the role is the machinery of publishing XEPs, plus typo corrections and wordsmithery.

(Well, one would hope very minor wordsmithery)

Is there some detail somewhere? I am doing the wensite work at the moment (getting there slowly), but might be able to help?

Proofreading / writing marketing text I am good at. Technical specs / write ups is not my speciality

They're technical specs, but the XEP Editor isn't responsible for the content.

Laura, Ah. But you can't, quite yet - since you're not technically a member. In any case, the bulk of the workload relates to publishing.

Got you. I will stand down for now, just checking whether I could help as it seems resources are limited

It's not the resources that are limited - we've 50 something members that could help.

I should rephrase, vounteers

:-) Yeah, I'm being grumpy.

Nearly time for the Summit, that will make it all better :)

Yes, indeed. My train leaves at 0818, I'll arrive in Brussels at 1805... One of those times living out here gets annoying.

I can almost get to the US quicker.

Ouch.

Where are you?!

Carmarthen, West Wales.

So I'll pass by Surevine at least three or four times along the journey. :-)

dwd, oh, we're on the same train :)

How exciting.

Anyone on the 3ish pm Eurostar?

Is Ian coming along too?

dwd, sadly not

Laura, That's the one. 15:05?

Ash and I are on that!

Yay, the XMPP train

The Isode folk are on the midday one.

I'm Coach 5, Seat 75.

(With UK power, natch)

Carriage 4, Seat 81

Coach 3, seat 53 & 54

I don't take 2 seats, 1 is for Ash

:P

Nicely spread.

Anyone else taking the train from Birmingham?

Going to guess not

MattJ, If they were, nobody else would admit to living anywhere near Birmingham.

I won't admit to living near it, but it's... reachable :)

Yes... I know how you feel. Swansea is, after all, relatively close.

I accidentally Swansea once, trying to get to Carmarthen

Verb of your choice

"drove on the M4 past"?

No, actually into Swansea

Driving out is the tricky part.

Because you're lucky if nobody's nicked your car.

If you've not seen the message, Surevine have pitched in for Dinner Money - €101 - six times. :-)

Yay Surevine

Indeed. And novel solution to the "binary problem".

but we still have the 100 slot open

also yay surevine

Germany seems like a dangerous place to be: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25922514

;-)

Yay Surevine (even though I won't be there for the dinner we are sponsoring!)

lets start our meeting in 3 minutes

okay

here is our agenda for today: http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/meeting-minutes/xsf-member-meeting-2014-01-28/

1) Call for Quorum

as you can see 32 members voted via proxy, so we have a quorum

2) Items Subject to a Vote

new and returning members, you can see all applicants here: http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Membership_Applications_Q4_2013

3) Opportunity for XSF Members to Vote in the Meeting

anybody wants to vote here in the meeting?

if not I start counting and prepare the results

Go

simon: anybody who wants to vote from the mountains?

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to vote after the wine.

Nobody needs to know

Zash: I'm afraid we will anyway

ge-voted.

4) Announcement of Voting Results

if you reload the page you can see the results:

http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/meeting-minutes/xsf-member-meeting-2014-01-28/

all new and returning members are accepted

error on Kurt's results, just fixed

5) any other Business?

6) Formal Adjournment

Thanks Alex

I motion that we adjourn

+1

thanks

https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/428283011470094336 is HIGHLY amusing

brendan eich saying that xmpp went too much enterprise. mentioning &yet. in reply to me.

:)

Is there a way to convert markdown to a XEP?