bearcurrent agenda items for todays board meeting:
Editor Team
beardoh!
bearEditor Team
GSoC Update
???
Simondid we want to mention anything about the upcoming SSL test day?
bearyes please
ralphmWoah bear, you're awake!
bearEditorial Team
GSoC Update
Upcoming Ubiquitous Encyrption Test Day
ralphmAlso, this is still pre-meeting, yes?
bearhush ralphm - you may scare me into going back to sleep
bearyes
ZashDid anyone write a summary of the last test day?
m&mhas joined
bearI don't believe so - I was finding it hard to know how well it did
ZashThere was some ML discussion, iirc
bearif you point me to some words that are close to a summary, I can polish them and make a post
stpeterhas joined
bearpokes dwd
bearpokes laura
LauraStop poking me! I;m here :)
bear:)
bearcurrent agenda:
Editorial Team update by Kev
GSoC Update
XMPP Test Day
???
LauraXMPPUK meetup / IETF
KevTo save issues if I don't pay attention in the meeting, Council would like to suggest Matt Miller, Ashley Ward, Stefan Strigler, Lloyd Watkin, Steffen Larsen and Winfried Tilanus as the Editor team.
stpeterat least is here for the Board meeting
bearthanks Kev
Kev(This is, for those paying attention, the list of all non-Council and non-Board volunteers who posted to the list request. It does not include those who implicitly volunteered by not raising their hand when I asked who was not willing to volunteer at the summit :))
stpeterheh
Kevbear: You have a PM from me, if you'd take a look please :)
bearuhhh
bearreads
dwddecloacks.
bearis that what a ducks does when it decloaks?
bearok, with dave here - we have everyone present - shall we start? laura, ralphm, Simon, dwd ??
Simonwaves
dwdWow. Full house.
LauraIt's a miracle!
bearand with that I shall...
bearbangs the gavel
Alexhas left
bearcurrent agenda: Editorial Team, GSoC, XMPP Test Day, XMPP UK Meetup
bearany other agenda items?
ralphmhere
bearno other items to add to the agenda?
dwdYeah, could we try and enumerate all the things we said we'd put off until after FOSDEM?
stpeterdwd: :-)
dwdAlso, FOSDEM renumeration etc.
bearok, first item - the Council has suggested a starting list of folks for the Editorial work team:Matt Miller, Ashley Ward, Stefan Strigler, Lloyd Watkin, Steffen Larsen and Winfried Tilanus
stpeterwe're numbering FOSDEM again?
ralphmwacks stpeter
bearunless any objects, I say we vote yea/nea for that list and then send out an email to members@
KevThat should be everyone in the "Editorial team" thread, sans Board/Council.
bearlooks in horror at his typing today
ralphm+1 om the Team
KevIf someone could double-check that, it'd be good.
Laura+1
dwdThe list looks good, and with enough people. I'm +1.
bearkev - the list is accurate
Kevbear: TY.
dwd(Without feeling a need to go hunt for more).
bearsimon?
Simon+1
ralphmWOOOO
bearthanks - I will email the members@ team and cc the above with the info
stpetergreat
dwdOh - is stpeter volunteering for the team, or is this a complete handover?
ralphmAssuming bear voted +1, too
bear+1
stpeterwe'll schedule an organizational meeting next week sometime
bearstpeter is specifically denied a spot on the team
bear:)
stpeterheh
dwdI'm fine either way, just want to know.
stpeterwell, we will need to work out processes and procedures and all that, so I suppose I'll be an advisor of some kind
bearI think yes, he is on the team
bearrigh
waqashas joined
dwdOK, cool.
bearok, on to the next item: GSoC update
waqashas left
waqashas joined
bearwe have had two groups add items to the project list but they are still lacking some details - emails have gone out for more information but the deadline is fast approacching.
bearwhat I would like the board to do is agree that Kev and myself will be making the final call to apply or not later this week after we have reviewed the projects.
dwdSure.
bearis that ok with the board?
ralphmI'm confidant that bear and Kev can make that call.
dwdIs the aim to do a "good" XSF GSoC application, or merely a "good enough" one?
ralphm+1
beara good one
Kevdwd: Good.
Laura+1
dwdOK, I'm fine with that as the policy.
dwd+1 (for the sake of clarification)
Kev"Good enough" doesn't get in to GSoC, generates work for the XSF, and generates work for the GSoC team who have to review all the applications.
KevSo unless we can be confident that our houses are well and truly in order (or made of cards, or something), I'd like us to not enter.
bearsimon has dropped off - i'll add his vote later, but right now it's 4 +1's
bearyes, given the status and nature of the work, I do not want to get us involved unless we have a firm set of projects
KevAs things stand at the moment, the IoT and BC ones are almost there, but not quite. Smack has appeared from nowhere without knowing who's involved, and the Gajim ones are incomplete. So unless things change, I think we should gracefully skip another year.
Simonhas joined
stpeternods
bearok, that is a Yes to allowing Kev and myself to making the final call for GSoC
ralphmindeed
bearthanks Kev for riding herd on that task
bearok, next item: XMPP Test Day
Simonsorry - connectivity issues.
Simonhere
beardo we have anyone who wants to write up a blog post about the upcoming test day?
bearthanks simon
dwdAt the risk of sounding immeasurably ill-informed, what test day?
SimonHappy to write a quick post and forward it.
bearwe should also get someone to write up a summary of the last one
SimonJust a "hey - we're testing security again"
bearthat works for me - email it to me and i'll get it posted
Simonbear: will do.
LauraDave won't be writing the blog then
ralphmLaura: :-D
bearthis will have the same tone as the last one - that we are notifying of the event and without any explicit XSF endorsements
Simon22nd is a Saturday incase anyone is wondering
dwdOh, this is for the manifesto thing.
bearheck, I don't even know what today is
fippois there a non-saturday test scheduled?
Simondon't know.
dwdLaura, I'll be *reading* the blog post, though.
bearfippo: http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Security_XMPP
bearok, anything else for test day item?
stpeterthey are all Saturdays
ralphmintentionally, I assumed
stpeterthe next ones are February 22, March 22, and April 19
stpeteryes
fippowell, at least one of the tests should be on a day when people using jabber at work should notice.
Simonstpeter: last I heard Google was promising to do something s2s wise. But not it seems not.
dwdSimon, I was told this by an anonymous Googler at FOSDEM, too.
Simonbtw, is jabber.org taking part in the tests?
KevIt is.
KevIt did for the last one, at least.
stpeterSimon: they promised by May 19, not necessarily before
Simonok - unless there is other security stuff, let's move on.
bearnext item - XMPP UK Meetup
bearlaura?
waqashas left
waqashas joined
LauraYes, just to say that Dave is helping me to organise the XMPP UK Meetup in March
LauraAnd I would like to share a blog post about the ITEF / XMPPUK meetup days
LauraIf I may
dwdI am?
Simonwhat's the final date?
LauraTues 4th March
bearplease do post to the blog and to members@
LauraAnd yes Dave, you are
KevThis is the meetup Lloyd promised me would be in February, so I could plan to attend :p
LauraI got bullied into moving it
LauraTo align with IETF event?
dwdKev, March is the new February.
LloydLaura: bullied? Oi!
LauraI have written ITEF / IETF - it's something like that
KevInternet Task Engineering Force.
KevI can believe that.
LauraAhhh
LauraThat
dwdKev, :-)
ralphmKev: you can still plan to attend
stpeterInternet Engineering Task Force aka IETF
Kevralphm: I can. That day is just jolly inconvenient.
ralphmwell, yeah, carnival and all that. I understand
LauraThat is all from me, just wanted all to be aware
dwdOh. This reminds me of another agenda entry.
bearlaura - will be posting to blog and members@ (or forward me the words and i'll do it)
bearwow - my english sucks today
LauraWill do. Fabulous
bearthanks
dwdstpeter made the (very sensible) suggestion of the XSF funding day-tickets for the IETF, so we could help people attend the XMPP_WG meeting.
bearwe should mention that in the members@ post
dwdI'd second this, and also extend it both beyond XSF members, and also beyond just the IETF fee, on a case-by-case basis.
ralphmbear: what is your native language?
dwdWe should probably vote on both.
dwdralphm, Growls.
bearralphm - grunts
Simonhas left
ralphm:-D
bearanyhone opposed to funding the IETF day pass reimbursement?
Simonhas joined
bear(doing it as two votes)
LauraNo
beari'm +1 on day pass funding
KevI do have a question about this.
bearsure
KevWhich is has anyone formulated what the benefit to the XSF is of arbitrary members being sponsored to attend?
Kev(blanket, rather than case by case - there are certainly members whose attendance is beneficial. I'm less convinced that it's all)
bearthe benefit is getting XSF members present and participating in the WG discussions
KevThat's what it does, it's not clearly a benefit :)
SimonI can imagine a hardship fund in extreme cases - but to be funding "arbirtary" members seems a little odd to me.
bearincreasing participation by removing a financial barrier
stpeterBTW, the student fee is less than the day pass fee
Tobiasfor locals of course
ralphmarguably, one can participate without being physically present
SimonQ: what is a day pass fee?
ralphm$350
Tobiasstpeter, been reading that in a couple years they'll be back in berlin (:
ralphm$650 early bird all days
stpeterwell, given that this is probably the last XMPP WG meeting, it might be beneficial to have some people who know about XMPP participating while we make decisions
LauraI am with Kev, I don't understand offering to pay for people 'outside' of our community?
ralphm(<=21 Feb)
dwdI think the benefit to the XSF is providing increased participation in specification development.
ralphmand $800 after
stpeterLaura: well, these are people inside our community
SimonI can see this making sense in the one-off case for xnyhps - but let's deal with this on a case by case basis rather than trying to establish a blanket rule.
bearI don't believe it was for outside of XSF people
dwdLaura, XSF members are (or should be) involved with helping to run the XSF. XMPP folk, though, are a broader community.
KevDo we have count(XSF Members) * $350 we can easily spare from the XSF kitty?
LauraGot you. I take my comment back. As you all were.
dwdKev, Actually, yes, I think we probably do.
stpeterrealistically how many people do we think might take advantage of this offer? let's poll the members to find out
stpeterI would say perhaps only a few, but I don't know
bearcount(XSF) = 52 but I don't think we will get 52
ralphmWho in this room would maybe apply for this?
dwdLaura, Ah, but there's a little point in my comment, which is that sponsoring XSF members without question probably isn't in line with our goals.
Lancehas joined
bearand if we have that problem, then I will back up my thought with getting the sponsor for that value
ralphmI'm am personally thinking about going.
Kevbear: I don't either. I just worry about writing checks we can't cash (sic).
stpeter(I'll not again that I think this is a one-time event)
dwdralphm, I honestly don't know whether I would ask for the cash or not.
stpeters/not/note/
ralphmdwd: and that, too
LauraWe could be creative here
LauraIf people did want funding to attend, we could ask for a commitment from them
KevI will probably try to attend, and I'm not sure it's reasonable to ask Isode to pay for it (given Isode's Alexey involvement in the IETF), or to ask Cath to let me pay it myself. So I might well.
LauraA little 'I will scratch your back if you scratch mine'
ralphmPeople will have to pay to get there. If they show that commitment, I'm ok with funding a day pass.
Tobiasif I were already near the event for other reasons, but traveling just for that, there is just too much costs involved (aside from the meeting fees)
stpeterTobias: yes
stpeterTobias: the meeting fee is the smallest part of it, really
ralphmstpeter: you'd be surprised for europeans
dwdstpeter, FOr the whole meeting, yes. Not so much for a couple of nights.
Tobiasindeed...i heard london isn't the cheapest place across europe
beardo we have a consensus on this: let's email the members@ list and poll to find out how many people would be interested in having the XSF cover their day-pass cost
dwdWe could see about a block booking at a hotel to cut costs. We've enough London or London-savvy people to help folk navigate.
dwdbear, I would rather email standards@ actually. Those are the people who would bring most benefit.
SimonWhat do people planning on attending the XMPP WG hope to achieve that is not being achieved at the Summits and on mailing lists?
Laura+1 to poll
ralphmdwd: not, say, the xmppwg list?
ralphmSimon: that's a fair question
KevSimon: I do generally feel I have things to say in the WG meetings, and saying them remotely is a bit of a bind.
dwdSimon, I think the simple answer is that the XMPP WG meetings are to the core RFCs what the Summits are to XEPs.
Kev(That is - I almost always attend the XMPP WG meetings, remotely)
fipposimon: the audience at the IETF is quite different from the summit one.
Tobiasfippo, indeed :D
dwdAlso, I think a clearly visible, vibrant community would encourage the reverse - IETF folk joining in with XMPP related activity.
fipposummit == people deeply involved in xmpp. ietf == mostly people doing other ietf stuff
stpeterSimon: decisions on the WebSocket draft, DNA/POSH, etc. - and perhaps this is an inducement for people to also participate in the XMPP-UK meetup (or perhaps the other way around: participate in the XMPP WG session if they're already planning to be at the XMPP UK meeting)
dwdralphm, And finally - the xmppwg list also works for me, but my possibly erroneous feeling si that the standards@: folk are the ones we really need - the broader XMPP community.
ralphmI suggest we set up a wiki page like we did for FOSDEM/Summit and have people sign up there
stpeteroh I don't think it would be good to post about this to the xmpp@ietf.org list
ralphmdwd: yes. I was already in favor, though.
stpeterthat would seem strange to IETF folk
ralphmstpeter: ok
bearwhat is the name of the ietf meeting - XMPP_WG?
stpeterIETF 89 - we care about the XMPP Working Group session, but there are other sessions on that day, too
stpeterhttp://www.ietf.org/meeting/89/index.html
bearcreates IETF_89 wiki page
stpeterthe agenda is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/89/agenda.html
dwdAn alternate way of doing this would be to agree a budget for sponsoring people to attend.
Lloydhas left
dwdThat is, how much are we willing to spend on this?
ralphmI note that the cut-off date for hotel reservations is in 3 days
dwdralphm, Yeah, but I sort of assumed I'd not be able to afford the hotel. :-)
ralphmdwd: sure, but people might want to know
dwdralphm, We could arrange an XMPP hotel, as it were.
stpeteris staying at a much cheaper hotel nearby
ralphmnod
stpeterthe IETF conference hotel is always hugely expensive
SimonDo we have a treasurer avaliable?
stpeterwe don't have a treasurer, only me
SimonCan you give an indication of the current balance?
LauraI can try and help to find cheap hotels if needed
dwdSimon, It's roughly $16k, as I recall, with approximately $1k committed.
stpeterwe have $16,866.37 in the bank, before reimbursing people for FOSDEM
dwdDamn, I was almost 1k out.
Simonok.
ralphmOk, people, I have to leave the meeting early. I'll vote later.
SimonI need to leave soon too.
SimonCan we agree for someone to take an action on this and move on please?
dwdSimon, What action would we like, though?
Simonimho that next step needs to be to come up with some options.
bearthe option on the table is do we offer to cover the day pass to those who ask
dwdSimon, I'm good with polling standards@ to gauge interest, and/or deciding on a budget for this.
Simonwho, how much and exactly what they will be doing on the XSF's behalf.
stpetersends a sample sponsorship invoice to the board@ list
bearI will create a wiki page, send an email to member@ and standards@ asking people to sign up
dwdSimon, Participation in the IETF is, like participation in the XSF's STandards SIG, purely individual.
bearafter getting that data we can then discuss what the cost will be
Simondwd: if it's purely individual then why the XSF involvement?
stpeter@bear seems reasonable
bearbecause, IMO, we should help folks attend who may not have companies behind them to help increase the XSF's visibility to outside groups
stpeterSimon: because we need to finish our deliverables in the XMPP WG at the IETF and if getting more people with clue involved will push us over the line, that's great for XMPP in general
dwdstpeter, Right, that.
SimonIMHO this should be effort driven not budget driven - what's the WG trying to achieve, who needs to be there, then who can't be there becasue of costs.
ralphmI'd be amazed if more than 7 people would apply for this.
stpeterralphm: agreed
ralphmand I'd support that
stpeterI would forecast maybe 5 people
Simonstpeter - thanks. I was missing that part.
ralphmso were around the 2k mark there
ralphmwe're
beark, let me get the wiki page up and start beating the bushes for people who will be attending
bearthen we can have some data to discuss next time
stpeterralphm: I'd expect so, yes
stpeterbear: WFM
beark, anything else to add or discuss?
Simon+1 for next topic.
bearthat was the last topic
dwdThere are people who wouldn't because of the other costs involved; I think we should be prepared to consider further bursaries as needed, but we can deal with that later.
dwd[16:30:27] dwd: Yeah, could we try and enumerate all the things we said we'd put off until after FOSDEM?
[16:31:10] dwd: Also, FOSDEM renumeration etc.
dwdWe can put off the first until next meeting. :-)
bearI will take it as a task to prepare that list for next meeting
KevI think bursaries for a select few people who can usefully contribute would be quite sensible. More so than offering entrance fees for everyone, probably.
bearand have the agenda in hand before
Simon+1 Kev.
stpeternods to Kev
dwdThe second, though, I just need an invoice form - stpeter, I think you were going to send a sample to the board@?
stpeterdwd: I just sent that
stpetera few minutes ago
beardwd - are you handling the invoice generation?
dwdbear, Just this once. I'd rather not end up being the treasurer. :-)
bearanyone have anything else to discuss?
SimonLast minute addition: Unless there's any other business, I'd like to mention the need for some kind of Tweet action and see if we can rustle up @XMPP or @XSF or something appropriate for the XSF to use to promote ourselves on Twitter.
SimonI tried reaching out to the owners of those accounts but didn't hear back.
SimonUnless anyone objects, I'll ping some friends who work at twitter and see if they can put me in touch with someone that handles dormant accounts.
LauraSounds good! I would really support this
bear+1 simon
LauraAnd will help Simon
Simonok - leave it with me.
SimonI'll report on progress next week
ralphm+1
bearanything else?
LauraNot here
ralphmDon't forget your members vote
beardwd, ralphm?
dwdNothing more from me.
stpeterwe could easily register xmppfoundation at Twitter etc.
stpeterthat at least is available
beari'll register that now
stpeterok
bearok, calling this meeting done - i'll get minutes up tonight
ralphmstpeter: that's a smart thing to do, and makes it possible to transition over to another one when it comes available
bearbangs gavel
stpeterralphm: yep
bearthanks everyone for a great meeting and discussion!
Laura*waves*
ralphmdate of next: +1W
stpeterLaura: I will review your ISOC blog post right now!!!
Laurastpeter: thank you!
beartwitter.com/xmppfoundation registered
m&mhas left
Kevhas left
bearwiki page created (but it is very empty - I ran out of words)
bearemail sent to members@ asking people to register on wikipage
ralphmbear: lorem ipsum
bear:)
Kevhas joined
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas joined
stpeterOK I updaed http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/IETF_89 a bit
bear:)
bearthanks peter
stpetergets back to his real job :-)
Tobiashas joined
kevinhas joined
Tobiashas joined
Ashhas joined
bearhas left
bearhas joined
Ashhas left
bearpushes "publish" on ISoc blog post
fippooh... thanks whoever fixed the voxeo logo btw
Laurahas left
ralphmstpeter: what? This is still isn't your real job?
bearfor the life of me I cannot figure out how to get the main page side bar to update
XSF Discussion - 2014-02-12