XSF Discussion - 2014-02-28

  1. Lance has joined
  2. Lance has joined
  3. m&m has left
  4. Lance has joined
  5. dwd has joined
  6. Maranda has left
  7. Lance has joined
  8. stpeter has left
  9. Tobias has left
  10. Lance has joined
  11. bear has left
  12. Alex has joined
  13. Santiago26 has joined
  14. Santiago26 has left
  15. Santiago26 has joined
  16. dwd has joined
  17. Neustradamus has left
  18. Zash has joined
  19. dezant has left
  20. dezant has joined
  21. jabberjocke has joined
  22. simon has joined
  23. emcho has joined
  24. Lance has joined
  25. Santiago26 has left
  26. Lloyd has joined
  27. Ash has joined
  28. Ash Just realised I completely missed the members meeting last night! Sorry everyone!
  29. Alex no problem ;-)
  30. Lance has joined
  31. Ash Glad to see I haven't been kicked out (yet)!
  32. Ash :)
  33. Kev Ash: You voted by proxy. That's more than far too many of our members managed.
  34. ralphm Kev: :-/
  35. Kev Or, at least, ISTR you did. If you didn't, shame on you :P
  36. Ash I did, Kev. Yes I did!
  37. ralphm Kev: publicly? Half-kidding.
  38. Kev ralphm: Not sure what the question is.
  39. Santiago26 has left
  40. ralphm the shaming
  41. Zash Public shaming, mouhahaa
  42. ralphm like with vote tallies for council, really
  43. Kev We explicitly note who did and didn't turn up for Council and Board meetings, because this stuff is important when voting on people.
  44. ralphm Kev: my point
  45. Kev There's a follow-up.
  46. Kev The problem with publicly shaming XSF members is that there're two possible outcomes:
  47. Kev 1) Those members who aren't contributing anything don't pass re-votes.
  48. Kev 2) Yet more people who blindly vote Yes on every issue, irrespective of whether they're sufficiently informed to do so.
  49. ralphm I think 2 can't be helped anyway. And maybe it really gives an incentive.
  50. ralphm I don't know to be honest
  51. ralphm just thinking aloud
  52. Zash Welcome to Democracy
  53. dwd I do wonder if we should switch to something like range voting.
  54. Zash range voting?
  55. winfried has joined
  56. dwd So you'd mark each [re]applicant from 1-5. Makes people think more.
  57. dwd Also, range voting defeats Arrow's Theorum.
  58. dwd (Which basically says that all voting is unfair)
  59. martin.hewitt@surevine.com has joined
  60. Kev I'm not sure how that would work. Each member application is independent, unlike Council/Board.
  61. Lance has joined
  62. Kev I think possibly we should re-raise the 'abstain' issue from a while back.
  63. Kev On the assumption that it's possible that many members vote 'yes' because they don't feel sufficiently informed to vote at all, and thus voting 'no' would be bad.
  64. Kev (One member did express this problem to me, which is why I brought up the issue months ago)
  65. Kev At the time I decided that abstaining was pretty much the same as voting No, but I think that if that person's vote is then not counted as part of the sum for testing majority, it'd be fine.
  66. Kev Little as I like the thought of fiddling with our bylaws.
  67. intosi How would you propose improving the informedness of members in this respect? Could lead to failed votes because people abstain, thus possibly not reaching quorum for (re)applicants voted on.
  68. Kev I think that a member deliberately casting an abstention counts towards quorum.
  69. Kev Is how you solve the second problem.
  70. intosi So in that case we could have a theoretical applicant X that gets 40 abstains, one yes, zero no and is thus voted in.
  71. Kev And for the first - well, you either have to make sure everyone's informed (which is a huge time sink - to be able to sensibly vote for XSF members you have to follow pretty much all the mailing lists and more), or let people say they're not well enough informed with an abstention.
  72. Kev intosi: Yes. This doesn't strike me as a problem.
  73. intosi Ok. That would make Abstain more of a 'Do not care either way'
  74. Kev Or, at least, far less of a problem than the current situation, where people are essentially casting Yes in place of abstaining.
  75. Kev Yes, that's what an abstention is.
  76. intosi Kev: that's a fair point.
  77. simon What's the problem we're trying to solve? Having too many members? Or voting for Council / Board?
  78. Kev If you wanted to vote against them, you'd vote No.
  79. intosi K
  80. intosi Fair point
  81. Kev simon: Current members see a new membership application and aren't sure if the person is really coming from nowhere without contributing (should be No), or has been contributing heavily and relevantly on a list they don't follow.
  82. Kev simon: So they vote Yes.
  83. Kev simon: So anyone applying to the XSF is guaranteed to be accepted.
  84. simon Do we need to limit members?
  85. Kev Yes.
  86. simon Why?
  87. Kev Because members vote on Council/Board.
  88. simon To be on the voting list you need to fill out a wiki page which suggests some interest in XMPP. And we want to reject these people (who probably won't be bothered to vote anyway) becasue?
  89. Lloyd Also apologies for not getting my proxy vote in, had planned some time to get it done but dwd can talk the hind legs off a donkey (never got that one) :)
  90. Kev simon: Because Council is critically important to the XSF's mission. If you have a system that encourages a disengaged membership, you move away from informed decisions on selecting a Council, and instead move to random selection.
  91. intosi Lloyd: if every member that didn't vote in time would feel the need to send appologies, we would have less of a discussion..
  92. Kev (And Board similarly has the power to screw everything up, so similar arguments apply)
  93. simon Kev: And the fear is that a disengaged member will just vote randomly?
  94. Kev I disengaged member cannot, by definition, make an informed decision on voting.
  95. Kev s/I/A/
  96. simon Are we seeing evidence of this?
  97. Kev One of the members asked a while back if I could raise the issue of abstentions because they were forced to vote by the bylaws, weren't sufficiently engaged to be able to do so properly, and so felt they had to vote Yes on everyone's member applications.
  98. Kev So yes.
  99. simon Right - that makes sense.
  100. Kev I suspect if you were to go down the members list, you would manage to find some people who have never contributed in a meaningful way to the XSF's goals, yet are members.
  101. Kev You can take voting attendance as some sort of evidence of members not doing their job, if you like.
  102. Kev I'll accept a handful of members missing single votes because Dave talks too much.
  103. simon yes. Although to become a member shows some interested in XMPP and perhaps we should be reflecting on what we can do to better rope them in and turn them into an army of XMPP supporters. I don't know the answer to this, but do think that we should find a better way of mobilising someone that goes through the effort of creating a page about themselves on the XMPP website.
  104. Kev But when around a third of your membershp (I didn't count) is missing, that's not screaming to me "I'm taking my role in the XSF seriously".
  105. Kev I think that's a dodgy basis.
  106. Kev I think becoming a member shows some interest in being a member.
  107. Kev The barrier to entry for voting is very very low. If people aren't even doing this, I don't see how we can hope to mobilise them into action.
  108. Kev There is also a group of people who /do/ vote and are interested and could be motivated into doing more, I'm sure.
  109. Kev See the group of people stepping up to the Editors team, for example.
  110. simon XSF membership was never very clear to me and when I asked was explained to me about 4 years ago as "Simon you should become a member becasue it looks good and you don't have to do very much" (or something along those lines).
  111. Lloyd So maybe, no vote, no apology + 3 strikes == out? Can reapply immediately?
  112. Kev Lloyd: Well, that's pretty much what we already have.
  113. Lloyd kev: is it enforced?
  114. simon I've learnt what membership entails. But I'm not sure it's clearly laid out anywhere or if it is, it's not publicised well.
  115. Kev Lloyd: Not always.
  116. Kev simon: Right, I think many membership applications are similarly motivated purely by "Hey, this makes me look good" arguments.
  117. Kev That's not an interest in XMPP, it's an interest in being an XSF member, and these aren't the same thing.
  118. Kev (Of course, there's the argument of whether just having an interest in XMPP is enough to justify being a member, but that's a must less clear-cut debate)
  119. simon Do we have any ideas of how do other communities handle this?
  120. Kev The IETF has somewhat involved rules around eligibility for things, and does away with having a wide membership that votes on it.
  121. Kev I like our simple model better, I just think it could do with slight tweaking.
  122. Ash I wonder if section 2.6 may help for members that don't attend or vote at meetings. Has that ever been used?
  123. Kev It has.
  124. Kev But that doesn't address the current issue :)
  125. Ash On another note, I just noticed this clause: "An applicant for membership may not be admitted if, at the time of application or consideration, fifteen percent (15%) of the Members of the Corporation are employed by or represent the same corporation or organization as that corporation or organization which employs the applicant or is represented by the applicant."
  126. simon Is there a page that explains the role and requirements of members?
  127. Ash I think we're getting close to that limit :O
  128. Kev simon: http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xsf-bylaws/
  129. simon Kev: maybe that's the problem - there's bylaws and then there's day-to-day expectations that need to be clearer and not buried in legalese.
  130. simon as much as I enjoy reading bylaws...
  131. Kev Maybe our membership application form should have a static block of "I understand my obligations..." that everyone has to paste.
  132. Kev But: I'd have thought that all members should probably have read the bylaws at least once.
  133. Kev This may be overly optimistic, though.
  134. simon I think you are assuming that everyone is a Kev. Nice as that would be...
  135. Kev So yes. Having some "This is what being a member means" page that it's impossible for an applicant to not have read, would probably go some way towards this.
  136. Ash That's a great idea Kev
  137. intosi It's not unreasonable to expect members of a standards org to read the actual standards governing that same org. The by laws are part of that.
  138. Kev Then the applicants can copy the text into their applications.
  139. Lloyd Reading the by-laws is somewhat like reading the instruction manual - I'd admit that I only did it after becoming a member (but had asked an existing member about responsiblities, etc)
  140. simon has added it to https://trello.com/b/ml9e82sE/xmpp-org-website
  141. Kev simon: This needs more than just going on the website, I think. It needs entwining into the application process.
  142. Lloyd kev: +1
  143. Kev I think this is supplemental to, rather than obviating the need for, the abstention thing, though :)
  144. simon Kev: yes - a "I've read <url> and agree to uphold my duties as a member" type blurb
  145. simon Kev - can I put you down to write a "What is expected of members" page for the new website?
  146. dwd has joined
  147. dezant has left
  148. dezant has joined
  149. Kev Not in the near term.
  150. simon we'd need this in about 8-12 weeks time.
  151. Kev Ask me again in a few weeks then.
  152. Kev I have no capacity at all for volunteering for additional stuff right now.
  153. Santiago26 has left
  154. Santiago26 has joined
  155. Tobias has joined
  156. dwd Hmm. I may have restabilised my DSL sufficient to join in the debate now it's ended.
  157. Kev Well done.
  158. dwd So... The nice thing about range voting vs abstaining is that if it's set to, say, 1-5, then '3' can be made equivalent to an absention. For things like Council/Board, though, it gets more interesting, because things like "split votes" cease to apply - that is, voting for someone makes them always more likely to get in, and never less.
  159. Kev I don't think this is really equivalent.
  160. Lloyd Heard back from the decentralise folk, they are taking proposals for another couple of days then will start deciding on talks/workshops (cc simon & fippo)
  161. Kev That 3 will still pull the average in.
  162. Zash has joined
  163. simon Lloyd - also heard back from them. Same story.
  164. Kev I don't have the cycles to run the maths, though.
  165. Zash has left
  166. Zash has joined
  167. fippo lloyd/simon: smae here ;-)
  168. winfried has left
  169. Alex I think thats a social problem which we cannot solve. I have been in many orgs, institutions or local (hobby) clubs. Always the same problem. A small amount of people is doing the most work, while others only enjoy their benefits.
  170. Lance has joined
  171. Kev "Can't solve" isn't the same as "Can't improve"
  172. Alex Kev: I agree
  173. Tobias has joined
  174. dezant has left
  175. Lance has joined
  176. fippo dwd: any objections against me submitting the starttls-dialback thing that has been lying around in my customxeps github thingie since last november?
  177. dwd fippo, Oh. Can I give it a once-over first?
  178. dwd fippo, I wanted to add some stuff.
  179. fippo dwd: git pull and then update :-)
  180. dwd Basically instead of just looking at the impact of TLS on dialback, I wanted to expand it to cover DNSSEC as well.
  181. fippo that would be excellent. i think this will make the whole DNA discussion alot more clear
  182. Sy has joined
  183. winfried has joined
  184. Sy has left
  185. winfried has left
  186. kevin has joined
  187. kevin has left
  188. Neustradamus has joined
  189. Neustradamus We are february end, when will be the date of the meeting? http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Membership_Applications_Q1_2014
  190. Zash Yesterday
  191. Neustradamus ??
  192. Neustradamus I have not received announcement...
  193. Zash http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/140227/#20:02:33
  194. Neustradamus and the date is not on the wiki page
  195. Neustradamus ...
  196. Zash Neustradamus: http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/2014-February/007674.html
  197. Neustradamus but I have informed that there is a problem with the ML...
  198. Kev Well, problem with your mail provider, in fact.
  199. Santiago26 has left
  200. intosi Neustradamus: switch to hosting your own mail while we try to resolve various mailing list issue. You then get to decide whether or not something is unwanted or spam, instead of Microsoft. I know that's a sucky answer, but it really works wonders for these kinds of issues.
  201. ralphm Also, the meeting is in the XSF calendar
  202. Zash I got spam from Google today. Much fun.
  203. emcho has left
  204. Alex Neustradamus: I can add other mail addresses for you to mailman if you want
  205. emcho has joined
  206. emcho has left
  207. emcho has joined
  208. Laura has joined
  209. Tobias has left
  210. Tobias has joined
  211. dezant has joined
  212. xnyhps has left
  213. Laura Just reminding anyone who can make the London XMPP meetup on Tuesday to sign up. Need numbers for pizza and beer (the things that matter) Meetup link broken but Lanyrd here: http://lanyrd.com/2014/xmppuk/
  214. Kev Can you count me without me signing up? :)
  215. Zash There's some names on the wiki too right?
  216. intosi Lauta: do me a favour, and include at least one pizza with meat, but without mushroom ;)
  217. Tobias has left
  218. fippo 00hey kev, I just noticed a new face on isodes managment team ;-)
  219. Tobias has joined
  220. simon remembers isode's whitepapers and adds them to the whitepaper victims^w provider list
  221. Kev fippo: Because you like to just check that page for fun? :)
  222. Tobias fippo, VP in Presence :) he'll be present everywhere soon
  223. intosi He's not VP in omnipresence, Tobias.
  224. Kev I should probably register for the WG.
  225. Tobias intosi, not yet
  226. Zash Laura: I would also appreciate if you could count me in without me needing to sign up somewhere
  227. Kev Zash: Oh you're coming over? Fab.
  228. fippo kev: well, because i had to unsub an email address that will be gone actually
  229. Zash Kev: Yup
  230. Laura Zash: will do, thanks for letting me know
  231. Kev Laura: You caught me in that too?
  232. Kev Also - seems there's 50 minutes left to register for the IETF thingy. I should get on with that.
  233. Laura Have now
  234. Kev Diolch.
  235. Zash Maybe I should too
  236. Kev And the country codes link is broken \o/
  237. Ash has left
  238. emcho has left
  239. emcho has joined
  240. Lance has joined
  241. emcho has left
  242. Tobias has joined
  243. emcho has joined
  244. emcho has left
  245. xnyhps has left
  246. Tobias has left
  247. Tobias has joined
  248. Tobias has left
  249. Tobias has joined
  250. Laura has left
  251. Lance has joined
  252. Lance has joined
  253. emcho has joined
  254. dwd fippo, I've done a quick edit or two. If I knew how to do a pull request in github I would do one now.
  255. Santiago26 has joined
  256. dwd fippo, Ah-ha, I figured it out now.
  257. Santiago26 has left
  258. Laura has joined
  259. Kev I've been using Github recently for some non-XMPP code (shock!), and I really like just about everything about it other than the pull request model.
  260. dwd It's just as well no future employer of mine is likely to spot that I don't understand pull requests, isn't it?
  261. simon Kev: what is it about pull requests that you don't like?
  262. Kev I don't like the merge model in Git.
  263. Kev Rebase all the way :)
  264. Laura has left
  265. dwd Oh, I mostly like merges, but only for real merging. Rebasing makes more sense in most cases.
  266. Kev The big problem with merging is that it breaks bisect.
  267. Kev And bisect is lovely.
  268. Lloyd rebasing is wrong imo and I don't like it one bit
  269. Kev Lloyd: You have every right to be wrong.
  270. dwd I was always fascinated by the Monotone suggestion for branching at the point a bug is introduced, fixing the bug on the branch, and then merging on release branches. So the VCS becomes your bug tracker. (Branch not meregd at this point? Bug exists at this point.)
  271. Lloyd :)
  272. Kev (I actually like the /concept/ of merges, in that it preserves information that is lost in a rebase. But they're unpleasant to manage, and break bisect. So pragmatism wins over principle in this case)
  273. dwd Lloyd, If it's one small change, rebase. Developing a lengthy feature, I'd go for a merge, since it'll preserve the history. Rebasing would work, but means you either have weird history that doesn't reflect the changes actually made, or else lose the history entirely and squash.
  274. Lloyd has left
  275. simon has left
  276. dwd fippo, Ta.
  277. simon has joined
  278. Laura has joined
  279. Laura Working on a gsoc blog for Philipp
  280. fippo laura: thanks!
  281. dwd fippo, Laura - What's this for? I thought we didn't apply for GSoC? I is confuddled.
  282. Kev I assume to say how happy we are that other XMPP-related projects are participating.
  283. fippo kev: exactly
  284. fippo and pointing people to jitsi and instantbird
  285. dwd Right, OK. TAB.
  286. Laura dwd: shout out about 'we may not be sponsoring, but projects still include xmpp' etc
  287. Laura I spent too long typing. What they said.
  288. ralphm Kev: if you think that bisect doesn't work with merges, I think you are doing it wrong
  289. dwd Yup. As I said, TAB. (Or rather, TaB, really)
  290. Kev ralphm: There are some (quite specific) cases where it doesn't.
  291. Laura fippo: all done
  292. Kev Where the breakage occurs in one branch, but the other branch contains build fixes (e.g. for new versions of dependencies or whatever).
  293. Tobias has left
  294. emcho has left
  295. emcho has joined
  296. emcho has left
  297. emcho has joined
  298. Kev (Which sounds contrived, until you actually suffer through it)
  299. ralphm Kev: this isn't really a property of branches, but the way you are looking for breaking changes, IMO
  300. Tobias has joined
  301. ralphm arguably, though, git doesn't actually *have* branches, even though they are called that
  302. ralphm it does have branch heads
  303. ralphm unlike, say, mercurial, where git-style branches are called 'bookmarks'
  304. Kev Right. I think the Git model for branches is great.
  305. ralphm Kev: You have every right to be wrong.
  306. Tobias :)
  307. Kev Indeed. I'll take advantage of it some day.
  308. xnyhps has left
  309. fippo laura: thanks. i'll see about tweeting it, my #webrtc audience might be larger (-:
  310. ralphm The problem I have with rebases is that people generally tend to write horrible commit messages while working on a branch. Merging gives a (second) change of writing a good one, that also has the general overview.
  311. Kev ralphm: I don't think that's a problem with rebases, really, though, is it?
  312. Kev It's a problem with terrible commit messages, and I can appreciate that.
  313. dwd ralphm, Actually, rebasing gives the oppoertunity too. git rebase -i is your friend.
  314. dwd ralphm, You even get to squash commits together for the pointless commits you did.
  315. simon has left
  316. simon has joined
  317. simon has left
  318. martin.hewitt@surevine.com has left
  319. emcho has left
  320. emcho has joined
  321. Laura has left
  322. Laura has joined
  323. Laura has left
  324. m&m has joined
  325. m&m has left
  326. m&m has joined
  327. emcho has left
  328. emcho has joined
  329. emcho has left
  330. emcho has joined
  331. emcho has left
  332. Tobias does our mediawiki instance allow fancy tables like that one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security#Web_browsers
  333. ralphm dwd, Kev: as long as those branches haven't been shared, I'm fine with that. In fact I like mercurial queues, which also really are mostly equivalent to sqashed rebased branches
  334. m&m has left
  335. fsteinel has joined
  336. emcho has joined
  337. Ge0rG Lance: what's the state of the push XEP?
  338. Lance Ge0rG: https://github.com/legastero/customxeps/blob/gh-pages/extensions/push.md
  339. fippo 0/names
  340. fippo err....
  341. Ge0rG Lance: using "her" re the user is sexist! :P
  342. fsteinel has left
  343. Zash has joined
  344. Lance then I will change it, so long as you would have likewise complained had I used "his" :P
  345. fippo just pushed a fixed link for the turn/rest draft to xep.ent btw
  346. dwd Lance, We should use a sexless robot for all our examples.
  347. dwd fippo, IIRC, xep.ent is the realm of the Editors.
  348. fippo dwd: right, so we sort out this procedure now :-)
  349. Ge0rG Lance: my favorite is "their"... I'll submit a patch request
  350. Ge0rG is sufficiently drunk to do some heavy editing :)
  351. Lance Ge0rG: heh, that's the state i was in when I wrote it :)
  352. Ge0rG Lance: the iq stanzas are missing the from/to addresses
  353. Lance and ids
  354. Ge0rG Lance: at least the initial register should be sent to the client backend service, if I read it right
  355. Lance ah, yes
  356. Ge0rG while the enable IQ should be sent to the XMPP server
  357. Lance correct
  358. Ge0rG this distinction is important enough to be added.
  359. Ge0rG shall I add it to my diff?
  360. Lance certainly
  361. Lance any language improvements welcomed
  362. Lance it feels very mealy-mouthed at the moment
  363. Lance lots of similarly named terms with nuanced differences
  364. Ge0rG Lance: is it a good idea to provide a specific service-value in the register iq result? like "push-023.client.example"?
  365. Ge0rG specific as in "different from the generic jid the iq is sent to"
  366. Lance possibly, in showing that it is possible
  367. Ge0rG I assume the service-value is meant to allow backend scalability?
  368. Lance or rather to not limit implementation choices
  369. Lance it could be a component that uses a resource to identify users, for example
  370. emcho has left
  371. Ge0rG Lance: the configure example is referencing no push service for the iq-get, but a given service for iq-set. is that generic or specific configuration?
  372. Ge0rG Lance: what about allowing multiple client-push-services?
  373. Ge0rG Lance: https://github.com/legastero/customxeps/pull/1
  374. Ge0rG +1 for the github web interface. it allows submitting changes even under the influence of alcohol
  375. Lance has joined
  376. Lance has joined
  377. Lance Ge0rG: again, placeholder. the idea is to be able to set a generic, blanket configuration and also be able to modify a config for a particular service
  378. ralphm I am really excited about this stuff
  379. Lance Ge0rG: yes, multiple client-push-services are allowed (but i may be misunderstanding what you meant there)
  380. Santiago26 has joined
  381. Santiago26 has left
  382. Ge0rG Lance: I am talking about how a client can get the general config, and the per-backend config, and how it can set them
  383. Lance ah, right. i updated the document to hopefully clarify that
  384. Tobias has left
  385. emcho has joined
  386. Alex has left
  387. dwd http://www.ggmania.com/pics//14/feb/evo/evo.jpg
  388. Tobias has joined
  389. Ge0rG yay! I contributed to a proto-XEP!
  390. Ge0rG dwd: I know I'm pestering you way too much, but do you have a feeling if/when you can bring the yaxim-MUC project into a state where someone else could look at it?
  391. fippo ge0rg: if he promised, it will take less than five years ;-)
  392. stpeter has joined
  393. Ge0rG fippo: this is a sensible upper bound
  394. dwd Ge0rG, For you, less than four years.
  395. Lance has joined
  396. dwd Ge0rG, More seriously, I'll find some time next week to run through a bunch more rebase steps.
  397. Ge0rG dwd: that's great. Next week is perfectly right, I'm having some days off...
  398. Lance has joined
  399. emcho has left
  400. emcho has joined
  401. ralphm has left
  402. Lance has joined
  403. Lance has joined
  404. Santiago26 has joined
  405. Tobias has left
  406. Tobias has joined
  407. Santiago26 has left
  408. xnyhps has left
  409. emcho has left
  410. xnyhps has left
  411. stpeter has left