XSF Discussion - 2014-03-19

  1. Ge0rG

    dwd: ping?

  2. Kev

    How're we looking on that sponsorship for replacing Athena? One of its disks now seems to have died, which suggests it has a very limited life expectancy.

  3. Kev

    MAM question (looking particularly at Zash and MattJ):

  4. Kev

    Is there ever a reason to store an archived element?

  5. Kev

    e.g. if a MUC adds an archived element, and then that stanza gets stored in the user's archive, is there ever a reason the user would want the archived stanza to contain the archived element?

  6. Zash

    It would make sense for the server to strip it and then replace it with its own

  7. Zash

    The prosody implementation attaches the archived element after successful storage of the stanza (and strips it right after carbons for outgoing messages)

  8. Simon

    what do you think of the <hr> above the <h2>? Like it? hate it?

  9. Simon

    sorry - wrong room.

  10. Kev

    Oh, yeah, definitely an hr above an h2.

  11. Simon

    Either someone tweaked XMPP.net's scoring or someone tweaked jabber.org's ciphers.

  12. Zash

    psst, xnyhps, could we get a list of previous tests? :)

  13. intosi

    Simon: Kev did the latter.

  14. Zash

    So, we want a before and after :)

  15. intosi

    Somethng like this? https://xmpp.net/result.php?id=3

  16. intosi

    That was the first test ran against jabber.org

  17. Zash


  18. stpeter

    I'll write a small post about it for jabber.org here in a few minutes, because it's possible that some clients can't connect any longer

  19. intosi

    xnyhps: would it be possible to alter the format of the permalinks a bit? It's very easy to iterate over all results this way ;)

  20. xnyhps

    Do you want old results to be private?

  21. intosi

    Do you want external parties to be able to fetch all results sequentially? If so, keep 'em like they are now :)

  22. xnyhps

    I don't really mind other people using this info

  23. stpeter

    yeah, I don't particularly see what the attack might be

  24. xnyhps

    If it included "this server has open registration" then it'd have spamming potential. But it doesn't.

  25. intosi


  26. intosi

    An 'older results' link for a certain domain might be a nice addition. Saves me spidering all results ;)

  27. intosi

    (or doing a binary search if I happen to remember the approx datetime of the rest)

  28. intosi


  29. dwd

    Afternoon all.

  30. stpeter

    hi dwd

  31. m&m waves

  32. ralphm grabs a coke

  33. Kev

    Just prior to the Board meeting, I repeat my earlier question: "How're we looking on that sponsorship for replacing Athena? One of its disks now seems to have died, which suggests it has a very limited life expectancy. Kev @ 9:55"

  34. dwd

    Gotcha. We should probably discuss this in the meeting.

  35. Kev

    If the money is there, at this point I suggest we just buy a new one.

  36. Kev

    Athena dying would be, roughly, catastrophic.

  37. intosi

    Kev: +1

  38. dwd

    But my personal response is that I got the distinct impression that people only wanted to offer the exact sponsorship levels we have without any distinct treatment for a hardware sponsor, so I didn't persue. I can revisist it though.

  39. Kev

    I don't think it needs to be exact.

  40. Kev

    I do think it needs to not be disproportionate.

  41. stpeter

    hardware sponsorships seem messier than just pulling in the money and spending it :-)

  42. dwd

    stpeter, True, but hopefully we'd get more out of a hardware sponsor, as well as some incentive for them to provide a service contract.

  43. stpeter

    dwd: I had not thought about that angle

  44. ralphm

    but meanwhile, let's just buy the damn disk

  45. dwd

    stpeter, But a sponsorship deal is absolutely going to take longer to arrange, etc.

  46. Kev

    ralphm: It's not, as I understand it, quite as straightforward as that with these ancient SCSI disks.

  47. stpeter

    some of these machines are old

  48. stpeter

    old as the hills

  49. Kev

    dwd: I think generally we shouldn't let someone donating hardware give them a logo on every page, where an equivalent sponsorship would only show on one page, for example. I could be talked around quite easily to variations on the normal sponsorship deal if they seemed proportionate.

  50. stpeter

    do we need to have another iteam discussion about whether we really really need physical machines or whether we'd be comfortable with something like rackspace or whatever at this point?

  51. Kev

    That is, as long as it ends up looking 'fair' to other sponsors, I don't think we should dogmatically stick to the standard levels, but they should be used as input.

  52. dwd

    Kev, That seems reasonable.

  53. Kev

    stpeter: in terms of as a 'web host' or as a VPS provider type of thing?

  54. stpeter

    more VPS - we do need source control and such, not just web

  55. Kev


  56. stpeter

    if I understand you correctly

  57. Kev

    Not having to admin the hardware side of things sounds appealing to me.

  58. stpeter

    me too

  59. Kev

    If we still get 'our own box'.

  60. Laura


  61. Laura

    Less shotuing

  62. Simon


  63. stpeter

    hi Laura!

  64. dwd

    Laura, Was that a hint we should get started?

  65. Laura

    Well, have you seen the time?

  66. dwd

    Is there a Bear?

  67. stpeter just poked bear

  68. dwd

    Laura, I'm an unemployed layabout, I don't look at clocks anymore.

  69. Laura

    You should never poke a sleeping bear.

  70. stpeter

    although it's usually not best to poke a bear

  71. intosi

    Kev: VPS would be nice. Or possibly not virtual, but a colocated private server where the hardware side is under contract.

  72. Laura

    dwd: enjoy while you can

  73. stpeter nods to intosi

  74. dwd

    Laura, I would, if my wife hadn't produced a list of jobs the length of my limbs.

  75. stpeter

    no reply from bear yet

  76. stpeter

    so I suggest we start without him

  77. Simon thows a few last minute items onto the agenda.

  78. Kev

    For the agenda: UPnP Liason team, please.

  79. Simon adds

  80. Laura

    Trello bord?

  81. ralphm

    Ok, I'll chair

  82. ralphm

    I was on holiday last week, not yet up to speed

  83. Simon

    Ralphm: shall we go through the tasks for last week first and see what's outstanding?

  84. ralphm

    Simon: I'll make that agenda item 1

  85. ralphm

    and other agenda items?

  86. ralphm

    0. Welcome

  87. ralphm


  88. Simon

    ralphm: sent you a link to the list.

  89. ralphm

    Simon: hm?

  90. dwd

    ralphm, Trello list; we discussed last week.

  91. ralphm

    I don't know what that means

  92. m&m

    I note that a decision still needs to be reached on membership-applications XEP

  93. dwd

    m&m, Thanks.

  94. m&m

    this is a one-week warning, the editor MUST have the answer by 03/26

  95. ralphm

    m&m: I think you are confused by Council rules on this

  96. dwd

    ralphm, No, they're the same rules.

  97. ralphm

    dwd: please point me to where that's stated?

  98. ralphm

    Simon, dwd: any way, what is a Trello and why do I want it?

  99. Laura

    The trello board is our list of items, what we are working on etc

  100. Laura

    Something to keep us focussed

  101. dwd

    ralphm, Trello is a kanban-board-onna-web. Simon started using it to track Board items, seems to be more useful than the previous system.

  102. Laura

    It's great

  103. ralphm

    ok, I missed that it was already in use

  104. dwd

    I hate it on principle (it's a cloud service I do not control), but other than that it seems good.

  105. ralphm

    Were there minutes of last week's meeting?

  106. dwd

    Not AFAIK.

  107. stpeter

    in any case, we can list the agenda items here, no?

  108. Simon

    I think that's a good idea

  109. Simon

    while raphm gets setup:

  110. Simon

    Wiki: it's a mess

  111. stpeter

    UPnP liaison team, website, London reimbursements, new machine / VPS, etc.

  112. Simon

    2. website update.

  113. ralphm

    stpeter: I'll list the agenda items, sure

  114. Kev

    Could we order them so I can walk away in a bit? :)

  115. Kev

    Unless we're anticipating running to time.

  116. stpeter

    Kev: yes that's why I suggested liaison team first

  117. Kev


  118. ralphm

    Kev: you can leave any time you'd like to

  119. Simon

    Seems Ralphm had a good holiday.

  120. stpeter

    ralphm: we have some Council-Board coordination

  121. Kev

    ralphm: No, I think I have to be here for the Council's report on UPnP

  122. Kev

    And possibly also for the iteam saying "buy us hardware".

  123. Kev

    But especially Council.

  124. ralphm

    stpeter: sure, but still

  125. ralphm

    anyway let's get underway.

  126. ralphm

    1. Last week's action items

  127. ralphm

    Is that the 'by next week' list?

  128. dwd

    Yes, I think so.

  129. ralphm

    'website building'

  130. Simon

    I'll start. I have a skeleton website building now - will commit that soon. No news on @xmpp (will follow up). Email sent for ideas on DNSSEC grant application.

  131. ralphm


  132. dwd

    OK. For my items, I have a template invoice for which I need to pick Peter's brains on one thing; then I'll invoice and finalize sponsors tomorrow.

  133. ralphm


  134. ralphm

    That seems it then

  135. stpeter

    thanks, dwd

  136. dwd

    I'd note that the membership XEP has had some more comments, by Peter, who suggested removing corporate membership from the bylaws would be his preferred option.

  137. Simon

    hear hear. +1 on that!

  138. dwd

    I'd still like to accept the ProtoXEP to put it into the XSF "system"; it'll be experimental (and therefore without force) anyway.

  139. ralphm

    dwd: I thought we were still at action items

  140. stpeter

    I'll need to propose that bylaws change before the next XSF members' meeting

  141. dwd

    ralphm, Sure, just covering "Membership XEP discussion and vote".

  142. ralphm

    Let's go on with that item then

  143. ralphm

    2. Membership XEP

  144. ralphm

    I have no objection to accept this as an experimental XEP

  145. dwd

    Nor do I, FTR.

  146. Simon

    happy with it as experimental

  147. ralphm

    Laura: any objections?

  148. Laura

    Sorry, no

  149. ralphm

    Laura: why sorry?

  150. ralphm

    Laura: not having objections is a good thing

  151. Laura

    Was apologising for not being on the ball! Just grabbed some water

  152. Simon

    She's British. "Sorry" is part of the language :)

  153. Laura

    Canadian originally, so even more so. Sorry.

  154. ralphm

    I don't think we really have to wait on bear to have this published. So I'll request our editor to publish it.

  155. ralphm

    stpeter: can you please do that?

  156. stpeter

    ralphm: the Editor Team will take it under advisement ;-)

  157. stpeter

    but yes

  158. ralphm

    3. UPnP liasons

  159. ralphm

    stpeter: splendid

  160. Kev

    Council would like to propose Peter, Peter, fippo and Joachim as the UPnP liasons.

  161. ralphm

    Kev: noted.

  162. Simon

    I wish them luck and "great success"!

  163. ralphm

    I move we take the Council's recommendation and install the UPnP liasons accordingly.

  164. Simon


  165. Laura


  166. dwd

    Just for the sake of clarity, that's Peter Saint-Andre, Peter Waher, Joachim Lindborg, and Philipp Hancke?

  167. Kev


  168. dwd


  169. ralphm

    dwd: indeed. thanks

  170. ralphm

    I conclude we now have 4 UPnP liason people

  171. ralphm cheers

  172. ralphm

    Do we need to discuss further steps here?

  173. Kev

    I think this is now Done.

  174. ralphm


  175. stpeter

    agreed, done

  176. ralphm

    4. The Wiki

  177. ralphm

    (it's a mess)

  178. Laura

    I don't have much to say on this, other than who manages the content?

  179. Laura

    Because it is a mess

  180. dwd

    Laura, Thanks for volunteering?

  181. ralphm

    Laura: everyone :-D

  182. Laura

    Not until the website is done!

  183. Laura

    No more big projects. One at at time

  184. stpeter

    do we really need a wiki or shall we just put that effort into the real website?

  185. Laura

    Step forward dave?!

  186. ralphm

    stpeter: I think we should step back a bit

  187. ralphm

    what in the wiki is a mess

  188. Laura

    Depends on what we want from the wiki.

  189. ralphm


  190. Simon

    Peter: I thought a lot about this. I do think there is a need for a wiki.

  191. ralphm

    it is used for many different things

  192. Laura

    If we want to share info - this should be the website

  193. dwd

    FWIW, there is the email I forwarded to Board for last week, which discusses someone wnating to do something with the Wiki.

  194. Laura

    If we want to use it as a wiki (chuck content in here for collaboration / review), then we need one

  195. Simon

    The way that Laura and I are working on the static site, we're going to need a way that "everyone" can quickly update wiki-like content for different projects.

  196. Simon

    My goal with the xmpp.org site is that it can be good enough that great content from the wiki can bubble-up to it and be presented more professionally.

  197. ralphm

    seems sensible

  198. dwd

    I do like things such as the security guides, which benefit from anyone being able to add information into the page quickly.

  199. Simon

    but, we have a huge amount of work with xmpp.org still so I'd like to avoid any other wiki clean-up work until we have a good understanding of what the main site is for, doing, and how well it's working.

  200. ralphm

    I still want to get a feeling of what 'a mess' means.

  201. dwd

    And yes, I think if good content can bubble up, that's also good.

  202. stpeter

    Simon: do you mean that (a) we'd use the wiki as a scratchpad of sorts and then move stable information from the wiki to the real site, or that (b) the real site would be editable enough that we would no longer need a separate wiki?

  203. stpeter

    oh, I see that you mean (a)

  204. dwd

    I'd prefer that the real site was never quite as openly editable as the Wiki.

  205. stpeter

    because you say that there is a need for a wiki

  206. stpeter

    so carry on

  207. Simon

    stpeter: the main site will be editable with pull requests. I'd like to get a good workflow before promising anything more.

  208. ralphm


  209. stpeter


  210. ralphm

    I sense we just keep things as-is, for now

  211. ralphm

    5. Hardware

  212. stpeter

    sure the wiki is a mess but I'd prefer that we put energy into the main site

  213. Laura


  214. stpeter

    Laura: yes!

  215. Simon

    +1 on that (Laura - lets get our content written/delegated to authors, then see what overlap there is with the wiki and clean up post-launch)

  216. ralphm

    Kev mentioned before the meeting really started that we have some hardware issues that need urgent attention

  217. dwd

    Options are either than we spend money (fast, simple, costly) or that we persue specific sponsorship.

  218. Simon

    Ralphm: you are missing the website topic. (4) I hope we can come back to that after the HW discussion.

  219. ralphm

    Simon: I saw it as a bag, not and ordered list

  220. ralphm


  221. stpeter


  222. Simon

    as long as it's in the bag.

  223. Simon

    is there a good reason to be running and maintaining our own hardware in 2014?

  224. intosi

    Athena is running on one disk. We need to address this sooner than later.

  225. ralphm

    dwd: so I saw mention of a vps. Does it need to be dedicated hardware, or is a cloud box ok, as well?

  226. intosi

    Simon: own hardware not so much, own "system": yes.

  227. Simon

    intosi: I get that.

  228. Simon


  229. dwd

    ralphm, I can't answer - that's a question for the Infrastructure Team.

  230. ralphm

    dwd: I see Kev and intosi here, they have voice

  231. Kev

    Simon: I think if someone can come up with a way of us getting an appropriately specced server, of any nature, that's OK.

  232. Kev

    Provided our expectations of uptime etc. can be met.

  233. Simon

    Kev: what is this server used for and what is it's spec?

  234. Kev

    It's very old.

  235. Kev

    It has something like 100G of storage, if that.

  236. ralphm

    Kev: I would be happy to see if I can get something arranged at Rackspace

  237. Kev

    And 512meg RAM maybe?

  238. intosi

    74G disk

  239. intosi

    4G RAM.

  240. dwd

    intosi, What's our timeframe here? 1 week? 1 month?

  241. Simon

    How much are we paying for this?

  242. Kev

    intosi: Oh, so it has.

  243. Kev

    Simon: Nothing.

  244. intosi

    dwd: when will your disk crash?

  245. dwd

    intosi, Tomorrow, I have it in the calendar.

  246. Kev

    dwd: As soon as humanly possible, I think. Likely the disk will not crash. If it does, this is ~=catastrophic.

  247. Kev

    I mean, we can recover, but we're websiteless in the meantime.

  248. Zash

    Are there backups?

  249. Kev

    Zash: Yes.

  250. intosi

    Zash: yes

  251. dwd

    OK, then we should just pay money, if only as an interim.

  252. Kev

    dwd: Pay money to rackspace or for a machine?

  253. intosi

    Finding a suitable disk isn't very straightforward. It's ancient. Setting up a VPS as an exact mirror might be quicker.

  254. dwd

    Rackspace or similar seems fastest.

  255. stpeter

    websiteless but also without source control

  256. dwd

    stpeter, Which is frightening, yes.

  257. stpeter


  258. ralphm

    Kev: I'd prefer not paying anything, obviously

  259. Kev

    I don't have a significant issue with going with Rackspace or similar. I just note that our current arrangement has served us well for many years, so I have a natural concern about changing models that work.

  260. Simon

    so this machine is ancient - I move that we simply get a VPS/new machine and migrate. Our time is all more valuable than hunting down old SAS disks.

  261. dwd

    Kev, Yes, indeed. But I think we should find an *interim* solution as rapidly as possible.

  262. Kev

    I'm fine with that.

  263. ralphm

    I even have personal credit of $200/month

  264. Simon

    Of course this is a call for the infrastructure team but this box does sound like it's well past it's prime.

  265. dwd

    Kev, That should give us sufficient breathing sp[ace to consider the next steps.

  266. intosi

    Simon: the machine needs replacing.

  267. Kev

    Simon: Well, we need money or sponsorship for a new 'box', which is why it's Boardish too.

  268. intosi

    A new disk would be interim as well.

  269. Kev

    Simon: iteam asked for a new machine some time ago (years?) as I recall.

  270. intosi

    Kev: at least two years back.

  271. ralphm

    Kev, intosi, let you and I work this out OOB?

  272. Simon

    Would it not make sense to use our budget for a http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produkte_rootserver/ex40ssd and be done with this hardware maintainance problem?

  273. Kev

    ralphm: That works fine for me, thank you.

  274. Simon

    or quivalent in equivalent land.

  275. intosi

    ralphm: works for me

  276. Simon

    (assuming Ralphm can't get something worked out)

  277. ralphm


  278. intosi

    We do have ds0039 as a quick diversion, which is also quite old.

  279. dwd

    Simon, Quite possibly. That said, we do have a very good hosting deal for solid tin right now, so I wouldn't want to make that kind of decision under this much time pressure.

  280. Kev

    The big issue is going to be database migration. I don't suppose we're near the website being ready? Migrating to the static site would be easier :)

  281. dwd

    In the meantime, do we have a relatively hot backup of git?

  282. ralphm

    dwd: I don't think it needs to be an either/or thing

  283. dwd

    ralphm, This is also true.

  284. Kev

    dwd: Yes, I think Git is something we can be confident to be able to easily get back a recent version.

  285. Simon

    Kev: nowhere close on the website - still loads to do.

  286. ralphm

    6. Website

  287. Laura

    I can update

  288. Laura

    Site map is drafted and each page has a ticket on the Trello Board.

  289. Simon

    Trello link: https://trello.com/b/ml9e82sE/xmpp-org-website

  290. Laura

    (Note - this is the 'amrketing' front, Simon is collating all info for Technical)

  291. Laura

    Marketing even

  292. Laura

    The trello links through to a google doc where the content will be drafted for each page

  293. Simon

    Yes, I'm drafting in victims^Wauthors, so if you see something that you can help with, please jump in.

  294. Laura

    I am going to email the Group so people know where to suggest / add content

  295. Laura

    As we complete each page, we nudge Bear and the build / design begins

  296. Laura

    Over and out.

  297. Simon

    Still early days though but we'll start speccing out bits in more detail soon: eg Audience, length, etc.

  298. Simon

    that's it from my side on the topic.

  299. dwd

    How much of the content can be directly reused from existing resource?

  300. Laura

    Lots. That is my job this weekend

  301. Laura

    It just needs a freshen up and a bit of tweaking

  302. Laura

    We have lots, the key is cutting it down to be consumable and useful

  303. Laura

    And tweak the language

  304. dwd

    So how far off the "minimally viable website" are we?

  305. Laura

    We will have the first pages of content next week. I need Bear to estimate more

  306. Simon

    DWD: it's more that it doesn't make sense to yank down the old one until we have a good enought replacement.

  307. Laura

    It should all move quicly now - the behind the scenes stuff that has gone on does take time

  308. dwd

    Simon, No, I get that. I'm wondering when we'd have a basic site up on a staging site.

  309. ralphm

    Also, please make sure old URLs redirect properly (forever)

  310. dwd

    Simon, In particular, I'm thinking that once something's visible, we might well get a lot more contributions going on.

  311. Simon

    dwd - as soon as I have the build actually working and deploying I'll send around a shadow site that we can then pivot over.

  312. Simon

    do we have any analytics on the current website so that we can see what people are actually interested in?

  313. Laura

    I REALLY want this on the new site so we can make changes as needed / dictated by use

  314. Kev

    Simon: I heavily suspect that the vast majority of hits are to the XEPs themselves, rather than the other material. I could be wrong.

  315. ralphm

    ok, we don't actually need to hash this all out in the meeting, I think

  316. Kev

    Probably true.

  317. Simon

    more updates next week on the topic I'm sure.

  318. stpeter

    sorry folks I need to depart here, but will be back later

  319. ralphm

    Let's make it an action item that we get a better estimate, that shows up in the minutes Simon is writing (right? RIGHT?)

  320. Simon


  321. Simon

    I can do.

  322. ralphm


  323. ralphm


  324. ralphm

    7. AOB

  325. ralphm

    Haven't heard any.

  326. dwd

    None from me.

  327. ralphm

    8. Date of next

  328. ralphm


  329. ralphm

    oh, wait

  330. ralphm

    +1W still

  331. dwd

    When is Stupid Time Zone Change Day?

  332. ralphm

    dwd: last weekend of March

  333. dwd

    WHat about for the US?

  334. ralphm

    they already switched

  335. Kev

    dwd: Already happened.

  336. ralphm

    Let's keep it the same time one week more

  337. ralphm

    9. Close

  338. ralphm

    Thanks all!

  339. Laura


  340. ralphm bangs gavel

  341. Simon

    Bye everyone

  342. ralphm


  343. intosi

    ralphm: enjoy!

  344. Kev

    Re: unnatural persons being members.

  345. Kev

    I'd feel happier if someone could come up with a reason why we might want to allow it.

  346. Kev

    At the moment it seems we're unanimously against it, which makes me worry that we're missing something.

  347. m&m

    Citizens United!

  348. dwd

    Well, first you need to consider what it means to have it.

  349. Kev

    (In as much as someone thought it was important enough to include in our bylaws, and I don't currently understand why)

  350. dwd

    I'd love to discuss this, actually, but I'm being called to eat Toad In The Hole.

  351. dwd


  352. dwd

    I'll be back later though.

  353. intosi

    dwd: didn't you mention BGP hijacking recently?

  354. intosi


  355. dwd

    intosi, I mentioned routing-based attacks as the sole attack against a DNSSEC/Anon-TLS dialback. BGP hijacking being the likely case.

  356. intosi

    Ah, that must be why I remembered BGP hijacking ;)

  357. Zash


  358. Simon

    dwd: presumably in such an attack, you have some notion of upstream keys and software would/could warn #thinking-aloud.

  359. intosi


  360. Zash

    fwiw, I've implemented SRV lookups for incoming s2s connections in the Prosody DANE plugin. It's messy, but it works.

  361. Simon

    zash: I think this is the preferred solution - http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2385 but most operators ignore it according to posts I see on the nanog list.

  362. dwd

    Zash, Still feels ugly to me, to be honest. But I suppose it'll have to do.

  363. Zash

    Seems it'll be a tradeoff between code complexity and operational complexity

  364. m&m


  365. dwd

    Ash, "Un-natural members"? :-)

  366. dwd

    m&m, I suppose there's also weight-zero. Though that'd require an update to SRV itself.

  367. Zash

    weight zero?

  368. dwd

    So you have an SRV record with various priority/weight for incoming, but if there's also records with weight zero, that might indicate an outgoing-only endpoint.

  369. Zash

    That'll require an update to SRV, yeah

  370. m&m

    that's a big might

  371. m&m

    and would break a few existing delpoyments

  372. xnyhps

    I thought weight 0 was legal, and would only be used when the total weight for that priority was 0?

  373. m&m

    xnyhps: eh, effectively

  374. m&m

    well, they're all equally treated as the last kid picked

  375. m&m

    since you can have multiple weight=0 for a given priority

  376. dwd

    xnyhps, Oh, yes, might be that. I vaguely recall.

  377. Ash

    dwd: Yeah. It was supposed to be funny. I probably should have put quotes round it or something!

  378. m&m

    Ash: are you worried about zombies applying?

  379. dwd

    m&m, I have wondered if some of our members *are* zombies.

  380. Ash

    I'm pretty certain we don't have any "un-natural" members (as opposed to natural persons), but thought I'd bring it up!

  381. dwd

    Ash, We don't, no.

  382. m&m

    dwd: I was going to say his concerns are too late for the current membership

  383. Ash


  384. Tobias


  385. dwd

    The interesting question is what would happen if we had a company apply.

  386. ralphm

    it would be voted on

  387. Ash

    Has it ever actually happened?

  388. Ash

    I assume not

  389. dwd

    Ash, Not to my knowledge. Possibly before my time.

  390. m&m

    not to my knoweldge

  391. m&m


  392. m&m

    Jabber, Inc. considered at one point

  393. dwd

    ralphm, Right, but assume it gets in. It then has voting rights, etc.

  394. ralphm

    yes, but only one

  395. dwd

    ralphm, Moreover, Council is made up of members, and nothing appears to limit that to only natural members.

  396. m&m


  397. ralphm

    I haven't seen a problem with that yet

  398. dwd

    I'm personally not entirely against companies being members, but a company being on Council I do worry over; I don't think it'd be useful (or right).

  399. Ash

    It'd be a bit weird

  400. m&m

    more than a bit

  401. ralphm


  402. ralphm

    Is a company an individual?

  403. dwd

    Well, let me rephrase. We assume a company will act in corporate interest - this is of debatable use, but probably little harm, for operating the XSF, but outright dangerous when dealing with Council issues.

  404. m&m


  405. Zash

    What would a company gain from being an XSF member?

  406. m&m

    is there any limit on board members being people?

  407. dwd

    ralphm, "person", "individual", etc are all non-restrictive terms in US law; they can apply to natural persons, corporations, and even estates in probate.

  408. dwd

    m&m, Well, I got in.

  409. Zash

    Legal entities :)

  410. dwd

    Zash, Right - though that term includes natural persons as well.

  411. Zash

    dwd: That was what I meant.

  412. ralphm

    I wasn't sure if 'individual' is legally narrower

  413. m&m

    only if explicitly defined

  414. dwd


  415. dwd

    Oh, when I examined the details of what manner of entities can become members of the XSF and Council, I also realised that sovereign states can also join.

  416. Zash


  417. Zash

    and the EU

  418. dwd

    Zash, I'm not absolutely sure about the EU. Probably, though.

  419. m&m


  420. dwd

    m&m, Pass. :-)

  421. m&m

    not that it would matter, they don't do anything anyways

  422. m&m

    well, we might get a strongly worded letter at some point

  423. ralphm

    dwd: including the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, I assume, then

  424. ralphm

    dwd: even though I am not a lawyer, I am mostly sure that 'invidiual' is a natural person, even in the US.

  425. dwd

    ralphm, See the link I pasted?

  426. m&m

    ralphm: you assume incorrectly

  427. dwd

    ralphm, "this restrictive signification is not inherent in the word, and that it may, in proper cases, include artificial persons".

  428. dwd

    As an adjective, though, it seems to preclude artifical entities.

  429. ralphm


  430. Zash

    Can robots join?

  431. dwd

    Zash, Nope.

  432. Zash

    The Robot Party objects!

  433. dwd

    m&m, BTW, Bylaws, §4.2 - "Directors may only be adult natural persons".

  434. m&m

    dwd: I did find that

  435. ralphm

    interesting that this is defined for the Board only

  436. m&m

    then I read < http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7159&eid=3922 >

  437. ralphm

    (and officers)

  438. Tobias

    m&m, did they already add the much demanded comments :D

  439. dwd

    ralphm, I think that'll be because it's legal boilerplate from some stock bylaw set.

  440. m&m glares at Tobias

  441. Tobias

    people should just write their JWKs in CSON (CoffeeScript Object Notation), which supports comments, and compile it to JSON as the hip kids do with JavaScript nowadays

  442. dwd

    ralphm, Whereas the Council, as you say, only talks about "individuals" - I suspect the *intent* may have been to preclude artifical persons, but I don't think it's likely to be quite the effect.

  443. m&m

    Tobias: you're behind the times … it's all about CBOR now

  444. dwd

    m&m, You mean PHOF?

  445. Tobias


  446. m&m


  447. m&m

    I appeal!

  448. dwd

    m&m, Instead of appealling, how about I look into it, agree you're right, but decide not to do anything about it?

  449. m&m

    oh, Barry

  450. ralphm

    dwd: what do you think is the chance of getting an artificial person on the council, in practise?

  451. stpeter wanders back in

  452. stpeter

    I must say I have never liked the term "natural person"

  453. ralphm

    yeah, what about Data

  454. stpeter

    such a lawyerly phrase

  455. dwd

    ralphm, Well, luckily, our sharp-eyed members would spot such a thing and vote against, being the careful and discerning voters that they are, right?

  456. ralphm

    or the Crystaline Entity?

  457. m&m

    more likely it was happen based on how close to the first entry in the voting bot it is

  458. dwd

    stpeter, I always think "natural person" suggests a nudist hippy.

  459. m&m

    s/was happen/would depend on/

  460. ralphm

    Philosophically, what is the difference in producing a sentient robot (when that becomes a reality) and biological reproduction of, say, a human.

  461. stpeter

    ah, philosophy

  462. ralphm

    stpeter: yeah, since you wandered in, I thought it was appropriate

  463. Ash

    ralphm: maybe when that happens we could revisit the bylaws…

  464. ralphm

    Ash: why?

  465. ralphm

    Ash: I'd love to have Data on the Council

  466. Ash

    Becuase we may want a sentient robot as a member

  467. m&m

    Data, sure … but not OMNI Corp

  468. ralphm

    Ash: I don't think that's a problem right now

  469. Ash

    If they had an XMPP interface they could vote so quickly...

  470. m&m

    even Lore might be some fun

  471. dwd

    ralphm, Speaking personally, biological reproduction of humans is a heck of a lot more fun.

  472. stpeter

    if folks are concerned about "natural person" vs. "individual" (I'm not), I will review my bylaws proposal

  473. dwd

    stpeter, No, it's unaffected.

  474. dwd

    stpeter, The "individual" bit comes into play with the Council wording, which inherits any restrictions on members anyway.

  475. ralphm

    stpeter: I'm not concerned at all, really

  476. ralphm

    Has anyone ever looked into https://github.com/JabbR/JabbR?

  477. ralphm

    Specifically https://github.com/JabbR/JabbR/issues/709 is amusing.

  478. ralphm

    I am still no lawyer, but I can't see how that doesn't violate the Jabber trademark.

  479. m&m

    I wish I hadn't see that

  480. ralphm

    Well, I think it is utterly stupid to call your project that.

  481. ralphm

    For various reasons.

  482. ralphm

    But most prominently the fact it *doesn't* do XMP.

  483. ralphm


  484. m&m

    for any of the trademarked definitions of Jabber™ I know of, this is most likely problematic

  485. ralphm

    m&m: I assumed so. I also thought that as a Board member of the XSF, who sublicense the TM, I should bring it up.

  486. stpeter

    that project was poorly named, yes

  487. Neustradamus


  488. dwd

    Board folk, you've a sample invoice to look at. (I chose not to bore the member's list with that one).

  489. m&m


  490. m&m

    well, that form is filled out

  491. ralphm

    Would it have mattered if I told you in private first?

  492. m&m

    not really

  493. ralphm


  494. ralphm

    I remember having a talk with a colleague of yours yeaaaars ago (2003) about a potential patent thing in a proposal of a change to one of our XEPs

  495. ralphm

    but was smart enough not to mention what it was about exactly

  496. m&m

    that I'm completely unaware of

  497. ralphm

    yeah, fortunally, I think we dodged the issue by coincidence

  498. ralphm

    Oh, look, the Netherlands is being occupied by US armed forces

  499. ralphm


  500. ralphm

    a large part of the urban area in the west of the Netherlands will be in total lock down for the Nuclear summit

  501. ralphm


  502. intosi


  503. xnyhps

    Heh, used to live really close to that.

  504. ralphm

    xnyhps: here? http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2014/03/nucleaire_top_cleansweept_nede.html

  505. ralphm

    xnyhps: or, eh, say, here: http://www.geenstijl.nl/archives/images/EH-eSUP-2014-01-NSS.pdf

  506. xnyhps

    No, I mean near Rotterdam Airport.

  507. ralphm

    xnyhps: which includes Eindhoven