XSF Discussion - 2014-02-12

  1. bear

    current agenda items for todays board meeting: Editor Team

  2. bear


  3. bear

    Editor Team GSoC Update ???

  4. Simon

    did we want to mention anything about the upcoming SSL test day?

  5. bear

    yes please

  6. ralphm

    Woah bear, you're awake!

  7. bear

    Editorial Team GSoC Update Upcoming Ubiquitous Encyrption Test Day

  8. ralphm

    Also, this is still pre-meeting, yes?

  9. bear

    hush ralphm - you may scare me into going back to sleep

  10. bear


  11. Zash

    Did anyone write a summary of the last test day?

  12. bear

    I don't believe so - I was finding it hard to know how well it did

  13. Zash

    There was some ML discussion, iirc

  14. bear

    if you point me to some words that are close to a summary, I can polish them and make a post

  15. bear pokes dwd

  16. bear pokes laura

  17. Laura

    Stop poking me! I;m here :)

  18. bear


  19. bear

    current agenda: Editorial Team update by Kev GSoC Update XMPP Test Day ???

  20. Laura

    XMPPUK meetup / IETF

  21. Kev

    To 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.

  22. stpeter at least is here for the Board meeting

  23. bear

    thanks Kev

  24. 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 :))

  25. stpeter


  26. Kev

    bear: You have a PM from me, if you'd take a look please :)

  27. bear


  28. bear reads

  29. dwd decloacks.

  30. bear

    is that what a ducks does when it decloaks?

  31. bear

    ok, with dave here - we have everyone present - shall we start? laura, ralphm, Simon, dwd ??

  32. Simon waves

  33. dwd

    Wow. Full house.

  34. Laura

    It's a miracle!

  35. bear

    and with that I shall...

  36. bear bangs the gavel

  37. bear

    current agenda: Editorial Team, GSoC, XMPP Test Day, XMPP UK Meetup

  38. bear

    any other agenda items?

  39. ralphm


  40. bear

    no other items to add to the agenda?

  41. dwd

    Yeah, could we try and enumerate all the things we said we'd put off until after FOSDEM?

  42. stpeter

    dwd: :-)

  43. dwd

    Also, FOSDEM renumeration etc.

  44. bear

    ok, 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

  45. stpeter

    we're numbering FOSDEM again?

  46. ralphm wacks stpeter

  47. bear

    unless any objects, I say we vote yea/nea for that list and then send out an email to members@

  48. Kev

    That should be everyone in the "Editorial team" thread, sans Board/Council.

  49. bear looks in horror at his typing today

  50. ralphm

    +1 om the Team

  51. Kev

    If someone could double-check that, it'd be good.

  52. Laura


  53. dwd

    The list looks good, and with enough people. I'm +1.

  54. bear

    kev - the list is accurate

  55. Kev

    bear: TY.

  56. dwd

    (Without feeling a need to go hunt for more).

  57. bear


  58. Simon


  59. ralphm


  60. bear

    thanks - I will email the members@ team and cc the above with the info

  61. stpeter


  62. dwd

    Oh - is stpeter volunteering for the team, or is this a complete handover?

  63. ralphm

    Assuming bear voted +1, too

  64. bear


  65. stpeter

    we'll schedule an organizational meeting next week sometime

  66. bear

    stpeter is specifically denied a spot on the team

  67. bear


  68. stpeter


  69. dwd

    I'm fine either way, just want to know.

  70. stpeter

    well, we will need to work out processes and procedures and all that, so I suppose I'll be an advisor of some kind

  71. bear

    I think yes, he is on the team

  72. bear


  73. dwd

    OK, cool.

  74. bear

    ok, on to the next item: GSoC update

  75. bear

    we 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.

  76. bear

    what 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.

  77. dwd


  78. bear

    is that ok with the board?

  79. ralphm

    I'm confidant that bear and Kev can make that call.

  80. dwd

    Is the aim to do a "good" XSF GSoC application, or merely a "good enough" one?

  81. ralphm


  82. bear

    a good one

  83. Kev

    dwd: Good.

  84. Laura


  85. dwd

    OK, I'm fine with that as the policy.

  86. dwd

    +1 (for the sake of clarification)

  87. 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.

  88. Kev

    So 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.

  89. bear

    simon has dropped off - i'll add his vote later, but right now it's 4 +1's

  90. bear

    yes, given the status and nature of the work, I do not want to get us involved unless we have a firm set of projects

  91. Kev

    As 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.

  92. stpeter nods

  93. bear

    ok, that is a Yes to allowing Kev and myself to making the final call for GSoC

  94. ralphm


  95. bear

    thanks Kev for riding herd on that task

  96. bear

    ok, next item: XMPP Test Day

  97. Simon

    sorry - connectivity issues.

  98. Simon


  99. bear

    do we have anyone who wants to write up a blog post about the upcoming test day?

  100. bear

    thanks simon

  101. dwd

    At the risk of sounding immeasurably ill-informed, what test day?

  102. Simon

    Happy to write a quick post and forward it.

  103. bear

    we should also get someone to write up a summary of the last one

  104. Simon

    Just a "hey - we're testing security again"

  105. bear

    that works for me - email it to me and i'll get it posted

  106. Simon

    bear: will do.

  107. Laura

    Dave won't be writing the blog then

  108. ralphm

    Laura: :-D

  109. bear

    this will have the same tone as the last one - that we are notifying of the event and without any explicit XSF endorsements

  110. Simon

    22nd is a Saturday incase anyone is wondering

  111. dwd

    Oh, this is for the manifesto thing.

  112. bear

    heck, I don't even know what today is

  113. fippo

    is there a non-saturday test scheduled?

  114. Simon

    don't know.

  115. dwd

    Laura, I'll be *reading* the blog post, though.

  116. bear

    fippo: http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Security_XMPP

  117. bear

    ok, anything else for test day item?

  118. stpeter

    they are all Saturdays

  119. ralphm

    intentionally, I assumed

  120. stpeter

    the next ones are February 22, March 22, and April 19

  121. stpeter


  122. fippo

    well, at least one of the tests should be on a day when people using jabber at work should notice.

  123. Simon

    stpeter: last I heard Google was promising to do something s2s wise. But not it seems not.

  124. dwd

    Simon, I was told this by an anonymous Googler at FOSDEM, too.

  125. Simon

    btw, is jabber.org taking part in the tests?

  126. Kev

    It is.

  127. Kev

    It did for the last one, at least.

  128. stpeter

    Simon: they promised by May 19, not necessarily before

  129. Simon

    ok - unless there is other security stuff, let's move on.

  130. bear

    next item - XMPP UK Meetup

  131. bear


  132. Laura

    Yes, just to say that Dave is helping me to organise the XMPP UK Meetup in March

  133. Laura

    And I would like to share a blog post about the ITEF / XMPPUK meetup days

  134. Laura

    If I may

  135. dwd

    I am?

  136. Simon

    what's the final date?

  137. Laura

    Tues 4th March

  138. bear

    please do post to the blog and to members@

  139. Laura

    And yes Dave, you are

  140. Kev

    This is the meetup Lloyd promised me would be in February, so I could plan to attend :p

  141. Laura

    I got bullied into moving it

  142. Laura

    To align with IETF event?

  143. dwd

    Kev, March is the new February.

  144. Lloyd

    Laura: bullied? Oi!

  145. Laura

    I have written ITEF / IETF - it's something like that

  146. Kev

    Internet Task Engineering Force.

  147. Kev

    I can believe that.

  148. Laura


  149. Laura


  150. dwd

    Kev, :-)

  151. ralphm

    Kev: you can still plan to attend

  152. stpeter

    Internet Engineering Task Force aka IETF

  153. Kev

    ralphm: I can. That day is just jolly inconvenient.

  154. ralphm

    well, yeah, carnival and all that. I understand

  155. Laura

    That is all from me, just wanted all to be aware

  156. dwd

    Oh. This reminds me of another agenda entry.

  157. bear

    laura - will be posting to blog and members@ (or forward me the words and i'll do it)

  158. bear

    wow - my english sucks today

  159. Laura

    Will do. Fabulous

  160. bear


  161. dwd

    stpeter made the (very sensible) suggestion of the XSF funding day-tickets for the IETF, so we could help people attend the XMPP_WG meeting.

  162. bear

    we should mention that in the members@ post

  163. dwd

    I'd second this, and also extend it both beyond XSF members, and also beyond just the IETF fee, on a case-by-case basis.

  164. ralphm

    bear: what is your native language?

  165. dwd

    We should probably vote on both.

  166. dwd

    ralphm, Growls.

  167. bear

    ralphm - grunts

  168. ralphm


  169. bear

    anyhone opposed to funding the IETF day pass reimbursement?

  170. bear

    (doing it as two votes)

  171. Laura


  172. bear

    i'm +1 on day pass funding

  173. Kev

    I do have a question about this.

  174. bear


  175. Kev

    Which is has anyone formulated what the benefit to the XSF is of arbitrary members being sponsored to attend?

  176. Kev

    (blanket, rather than case by case - there are certainly members whose attendance is beneficial. I'm less convinced that it's all)

  177. bear

    the benefit is getting XSF members present and participating in the WG discussions

  178. Kev

    That's what it does, it's not clearly a benefit :)

  179. Simon

    I can imagine a hardship fund in extreme cases - but to be funding "arbirtary" members seems a little odd to me.

  180. bear

    increasing participation by removing a financial barrier

  181. stpeter

    BTW, the student fee is less than the day pass fee

  182. Tobias

    for locals of course

  183. ralphm

    arguably, one can participate without being physically present

  184. Simon

    Q: what is a day pass fee?

  185. ralphm


  186. Tobias

    stpeter, been reading that in a couple years they'll be back in berlin (:

  187. ralphm

    $650 early bird all days

  188. stpeter

    well, 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

  189. Laura

    I am with Kev, I don't understand offering to pay for people 'outside' of our community?

  190. ralphm

    (<=21 Feb)

  191. dwd

    I think the benefit to the XSF is providing increased participation in specification development.

  192. ralphm

    and $800 after

  193. stpeter

    Laura: well, these are people inside our community

  194. Simon

    I 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.

  195. bear

    I don't believe it was for outside of XSF people

  196. dwd

    Laura, XSF members are (or should be) involved with helping to run the XSF. XMPP folk, though, are a broader community.

  197. Kev

    Do we have count(XSF Members) * $350 we can easily spare from the XSF kitty?

  198. Laura

    Got you. I take my comment back. As you all were.

  199. dwd

    Kev, Actually, yes, I think we probably do.

  200. stpeter

    realistically how many people do we think might take advantage of this offer? let's poll the members to find out

  201. stpeter

    I would say perhaps only a few, but I don't know

  202. bear

    count(XSF) = 52 but I don't think we will get 52

  203. ralphm

    Who in this room would maybe apply for this?

  204. dwd

    Laura, 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.

  205. bear

    and if we have that problem, then I will back up my thought with getting the sponsor for that value

  206. ralphm

    I'm am personally thinking about going.

  207. Kev

    bear: I don't either. I just worry about writing checks we can't cash (sic).

  208. stpeter

    (I'll not again that I think this is a one-time event)

  209. dwd

    ralphm, I honestly don't know whether I would ask for the cash or not.

  210. stpeter


  211. ralphm

    dwd: and that, too

  212. Laura

    We could be creative here

  213. Laura

    If people did want funding to attend, we could ask for a commitment from them

  214. Kev

    I 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.

  215. Laura

    A little 'I will scratch your back if you scratch mine'

  216. ralphm

    People will have to pay to get there. If they show that commitment, I'm ok with funding a day pass.

  217. Tobias

    if 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)

  218. stpeter

    Tobias: yes

  219. stpeter

    Tobias: the meeting fee is the smallest part of it, really

  220. ralphm

    stpeter: you'd be surprised for europeans

  221. dwd

    stpeter, FOr the whole meeting, yes. Not so much for a couple of nights.

  222. Tobias

    indeed...i heard london isn't the cheapest place across europe

  223. bear

    do 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

  224. dwd

    We could see about a block booking at a hotel to cut costs. We've enough London or London-savvy people to help folk navigate.

  225. dwd

    bear, I would rather email standards@ actually. Those are the people who would bring most benefit.

  226. Simon

    What do people planning on attending the XMPP WG hope to achieve that is not being achieved at the Summits and on mailing lists?

  227. Laura

    +1 to poll

  228. ralphm

    dwd: not, say, the xmppwg list?

  229. ralphm

    Simon: that's a fair question

  230. Kev

    Simon: I do generally feel I have things to say in the WG meetings, and saying them remotely is a bit of a bind.

  231. dwd

    Simon, I think the simple answer is that the XMPP WG meetings are to the core RFCs what the Summits are to XEPs.

  232. Kev

    (That is - I almost always attend the XMPP WG meetings, remotely)

  233. fippo

    simon: the audience at the IETF is quite different from the summit one.

  234. Tobias

    fippo, indeed :D

  235. dwd

    Also, I think a clearly visible, vibrant community would encourage the reverse - IETF folk joining in with XMPP related activity.

  236. fippo

    summit == people deeply involved in xmpp. ietf == mostly people doing other ietf stuff

  237. stpeter

    Simon: 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)

  238. dwd

    ralphm, 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.

  239. ralphm

    I suggest we set up a wiki page like we did for FOSDEM/Summit and have people sign up there

  240. stpeter

    oh I don't think it would be good to post about this to the xmpp@ietf.org list

  241. ralphm

    dwd: yes. I was already in favor, though.

  242. stpeter

    that would seem strange to IETF folk

  243. ralphm

    stpeter: ok

  244. bear

    what is the name of the ietf meeting - XMPP_WG?

  245. stpeter

    IETF 89 - we care about the XMPP Working Group session, but there are other sessions on that day, too

  246. stpeter


  247. bear creates IETF_89 wiki page

  248. stpeter

    the agenda is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/89/agenda.html

  249. dwd

    An alternate way of doing this would be to agree a budget for sponsoring people to attend.

  250. dwd

    That is, how much are we willing to spend on this?

  251. ralphm

    I note that the cut-off date for hotel reservations is in 3 days

  252. dwd

    ralphm, Yeah, but I sort of assumed I'd not be able to afford the hotel. :-)

  253. ralphm

    dwd: sure, but people might want to know

  254. dwd

    ralphm, We could arrange an XMPP hotel, as it were.

  255. stpeter is staying at a much cheaper hotel nearby

  256. ralphm


  257. stpeter

    the IETF conference hotel is always hugely expensive

  258. Simon

    Do we have a treasurer avaliable?

  259. stpeter

    we don't have a treasurer, only me

  260. Simon

    Can you give an indication of the current balance?

  261. Laura

    I can try and help to find cheap hotels if needed

  262. dwd

    Simon, It's roughly $16k, as I recall, with approximately $1k committed.

  263. stpeter

    we have $16,866.37 in the bank, before reimbursing people for FOSDEM

  264. dwd

    Damn, I was almost 1k out.

  265. Simon


  266. ralphm

    Ok, people, I have to leave the meeting early. I'll vote later.

  267. Simon

    I need to leave soon too.

  268. Simon

    Can we agree for someone to take an action on this and move on please?

  269. dwd

    Simon, What action would we like, though?

  270. Simon

    imho that next step needs to be to come up with some options.

  271. bear

    the option on the table is do we offer to cover the day pass to those who ask

  272. dwd

    Simon, I'm good with polling standards@ to gauge interest, and/or deciding on a budget for this.

  273. Simon

    who, how much and exactly what they will be doing on the XSF's behalf.

  274. stpeter sends a sample sponsorship invoice to the board@ list

  275. bear

    I will create a wiki page, send an email to member@ and standards@ asking people to sign up

  276. dwd

    Simon, Participation in the IETF is, like participation in the XSF's STandards SIG, purely individual.

  277. bear

    after getting that data we can then discuss what the cost will be

  278. Simon

    dwd: if it's purely individual then why the XSF involvement?

  279. stpeter

    @bear seems reasonable

  280. bear

    because, IMO, we should help folks attend who may not have companies behind them to help increase the XSF's visibility to outside groups

  281. stpeter

    Simon: 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

  282. dwd

    stpeter, Right, that.

  283. Simon

    IMHO 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.

  284. ralphm

    I'd be amazed if more than 7 people would apply for this.

  285. stpeter

    ralphm: agreed

  286. ralphm

    and I'd support that

  287. stpeter

    I would forecast maybe 5 people

  288. Simon

    stpeter - thanks. I was missing that part.

  289. ralphm

    so were around the 2k mark there

  290. ralphm


  291. bear

    k, let me get the wiki page up and start beating the bushes for people who will be attending

  292. bear

    then we can have some data to discuss next time

  293. stpeter

    ralphm: I'd expect so, yes

  294. stpeter

    bear: WFM

  295. bear

    k, anything else to add or discuss?

  296. Simon

    +1 for next topic.

  297. bear

    that was the last topic

  298. dwd

    There 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.

  299. 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.

  300. dwd

    We can put off the first until next meeting. :-)

  301. bear

    I will take it as a task to prepare that list for next meeting

  302. Kev

    I think bursaries for a select few people who can usefully contribute would be quite sensible. More so than offering entrance fees for everyone, probably.

  303. bear

    and have the agenda in hand before

  304. Simon

    +1 Kev.

  305. stpeter nods to Kev

  306. dwd

    The second, though, I just need an invoice form - stpeter, I think you were going to send a sample to the board@?

  307. stpeter

    dwd: I just sent that

  308. stpeter

    a few minutes ago

  309. bear

    dwd - are you handling the invoice generation?

  310. dwd

    bear, Just this once. I'd rather not end up being the treasurer. :-)

  311. bear

    anyone have anything else to discuss?

  312. Simon

    Last 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.

  313. Simon

    I tried reaching out to the owners of those accounts but didn't hear back.

  314. Simon

    Unless 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.

  315. Laura

    Sounds good! I would really support this

  316. bear

    +1 simon

  317. Laura

    And will help Simon

  318. Simon

    ok - leave it with me.

  319. Simon

    I'll report on progress next week

  320. ralphm


  321. bear

    anything else?

  322. Laura

    Not here

  323. ralphm

    Don't forget your members vote

  324. bear

    dwd, ralphm?

  325. dwd

    Nothing more from me.

  326. stpeter

    we could easily register xmppfoundation at Twitter etc.

  327. stpeter

    that at least is available

  328. bear

    i'll register that now

  329. stpeter


  330. bear

    ok, calling this meeting done - i'll get minutes up tonight

  331. ralphm

    stpeter: that's a smart thing to do, and makes it possible to transition over to another one when it comes available

  332. bear bangs gavel

  333. stpeter

    ralphm: yep

  334. bear

    thanks everyone for a great meeting and discussion!

  335. Laura


  336. ralphm

    date of next: +1W

  337. stpeter

    Laura: I will review your ISOC blog post right now!!!

  338. Laura

    stpeter: thank you!

  339. bear

    twitter.com/xmppfoundation registered

  340. bear

    wiki page created (but it is very empty - I ran out of words)

  341. bear

    email sent to members@ asking people to register on wikipage

  342. ralphm

    bear: lorem ipsum

  343. bear


  344. stpeter

    OK I updaed http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/IETF_89 a bit

  345. bear


  346. bear

    thanks peter

  347. stpeter gets back to his real job :-)

  348. bear

    pushes "publish" on ISoc blog post

  349. fippo

    oh... thanks whoever fixed the voxeo logo btw

  350. ralphm

    stpeter: what? This is still isn't your real job?

  351. bear

    for the life of me I cannot figure out how to get the main page side bar to update

  352. bear curses wordpress in 3 languages

  353. ralphm


  354. ralphm

    bear: ^, thought I'd help you

  355. bear curses wordpress in *4* languages