(re 21:44:26 Ge0rG> "The "S" in IoT stands for Security." just has become my quote of the year.)
mimi89999has joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
jonaswhas left
Guushas left
Guushas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
moparisthebesthas joined
xnyhpshas left
mimi89999has joined
mimi89999has joined
xnyhpshas left
SamWhitedhas left
Guushas left
Guushas joined
vurpohas left
vurpohas joined
Guushas left
Piotr Nosekhas joined
Lancehas joined
Guushas joined
xnyhpshas left
vurpohas left
vurpohas joined
xnyhpshas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
Lancehas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
Tobiashas joined
danielhas left
vurpohas left
vurpohas joined
danielhas joined
kalkinhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
uchas joined
suzyohas joined
vurpohas left
Valerianhas joined
Steve Killehas left
jubalhhas joined
Steve Killehas left
winfriedhas left
mimi89999has joined
Steve Killehas left
intosihas joined
mimi89999has joined
vurpohas joined
Alexhas joined
Kevhas joined
Flowhas joined
Kevhas left
vurpohas left
vurpohas joined
Lancehas joined
Kevhas joined
Holgerhas left
Holgerhas joined
Holgerhas left
Holgerhas joined
Holgerhas left
Holgerhas joined
Lancehas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
xnyhpshas left
xnyhpshas left
suzyohas left
Manchohas left
Kevhas left
Ge0rGhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas left
Ge0rGhas joined
Yagizahas left
jubalhhas left
Valerianhas left
vurpohas left
vurpohas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas left
vurpohas left
vurpohas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
lskdjfhas joined
winfriedhas left
lskdjfhas left
Ge0rGhas left
Manchohas left
Ge0rGhas left
Valerianhas joined
Guushas left
Ge0rGhas left
Ge0rGhas left
danielhas left
jerehas joined
Ge0rGhas left
Yagizahas joined
danielhas left
Yagizahas joined
nycohas left
Guushas left
Ge0rGhas left
Manchohas left
Manchohas joined
lskdjfhas joined
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
Piotr Nosekhas left
Piotr Nosekhas joined
Guushas left
Valerianhas left
Lancehas joined
kalkinhas left
waqashas joined
Lancehas left
ilmaisinhas joined
ilmaisinhas left
Zashhas left
Guushas left
jerehas left
jerehas joined
kaboomhas joined
Flowhas joined
Valerianhas joined
Guushas left
jonaswhas left
jonaswhas left
jonaswhas left
jonaswhas left
danielhas left
moparisthebesthas left
iiro.laihohas joined
Holgerhas left
lskdjfhas left
ilmaisinhas joined
iiro.laihohas left
Kevhas joined
jonaswhas left
Ge0rGhas left
jubalhhas joined
jubalhhas left
lskdjfhas joined
Zashhas left
Zashhas joined
Ge0rGhas left
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
Ge0rGhas left
sonnyhas left
mimi89999has left
mimi89999has joined
lskdjfhas left
Piotr Nosekhas left
lskdjfhas joined
vurpohas left
vurpohas joined
Valerianhas left
intosihas left
lskdjfhas left
lskdjfhas joined
lskdjfhas left
lskdjfhas joined
Valerianhas joined
lskdjfhas left
lskdjfhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
lskdjfhas left
intosihas joined
suzyohas joined
Tobiashas left
moparisthebesthas joined
moparisthebesthas joined
moparisthebesthas joined
mimi89999has left
sezuanhas left
jonaswhas left
SamWhitedhas joined
SamWhitedhas left
jerehas left
jerehas joined
intosihas left
Valerianhas left
SamWhitedhas joined
kaboomhas left
sonnyhas joined
xnyhpshas left
SamWhitedhas left
SamWhitedhas joined
Kevhas left
Manchohas left
danielhas left
SamWhitedhas left
SamWhitedhas joined
danielhas joined
sonnyhas joined
moparisthebesthas left
Lancehas joined
moparisthebesthas left
moparisthebesthas left
xnyhpshas left
kalkinhas left
kalkinhas left
sonnyhas joined
Lancehas left
Tobiashas joined
sonnyhas joined
jubalhhas joined
nyco
huh... is there a board meeting?
Zash
Never ending board meeting, yes
nyco
oh right
nyco
so is the gavel continuously banging? I don't hear it
SamWhited
(I keep meaning to ask RE the never ending board meeting jokes: is there a subject or something set that mcabber doesn't show? IDGI)
Zash
/topic
mathieui
SamWhited, the topic
Zash
> The room subject is now: Board Meeting | Logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/ | Agenda https://trello.com/b/Dn6IQOu0/board-meetings
SamWhited
Huh, I don't see that; maybe mcabber never updates the subject
SamWhited
I see
SamWhited
> XSF discussion room | Logs:…
Zash
Ha
Guushas left
SamWhited
oh no, I had this discussion with someone; that's the title of the bookmark (set by Mcabber or Conversations or whatever I added it with) which I guess was the title at the time; mcabber shows whatever the bookmark contains
SamWhited
These jokes are lost on me :)
Ge0rG
The subject that is the topic, but not the description?
vurpohas left
Zash
That's ... sorta sensible I guess
vurpohas joined
Ge0rG
SamWhited: why should it set the subject as the name?
SamWhited
Showing the bookmark title seems sensible, not sure about setting the bookmark title to the subject (but I'm also not sure what I created this bookmark with in the first place, so no idea where that came from)
Guushas left
Ge0rG
Easy XMPP clients will show the disco#info name. I'm sure they will.
SamWhited
Ge0rG: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I think it's probably Conversations that does this, so ask there
kaboomhas joined
Ge0rG
Unfortunately, the name of this MUC is "xsf".
SamWhited
maybe we should have a name, a pretty name, a description, a subject, and a bookmark name. *pokerface*
ralphm
Hi all
nyco
hi
Ge0rG
SamWhited: so the first item would be the "ugly name"?
SamWhited
Ge0rG: yup, the never-changing single-word-no-spaces-no-special-chars name (no idea why, just 'cause). Maybe it's the local part of the JID.
Ge0rG
SamWhited: see you in the SgmLxqI+A0tOdwPfVXNdd1H4 chat room.
arc
holy crap.
arc
Google can't even federate their own chat apps.
ralphmbangs gavel
ralphm
1. Welcome
Ge0rG
the board meeting goes into its third week
Guushas left
ralphm
Who's there, any agenda items?
Martin
*wave*
dwdtakes some minutes.
arc
Present
Guushas joined
ralphm
I assume nyco, too.
nyco
yep
ralphm
Do we have MattJ?
mimi89999has joined
nyco
https://trello.com/b/Dn6IQOu0/board-meetings
ralphm
As a note upfront, I've been swamped with work and haven't kept tabs on anything XMPP for the last two weeks.
ralphm
One item for me is IEEE
xnyhpshas left
ralphm
anything else?
nyco
Discourse, Board priorities
ralphm
OK
ralphm
2. IEEE
ralphm
We
arc
What happened to a decision on software listed on the site?
arc
That's old business
ralphm
've received a message from William Miller on IEEE IoT efforts and their desire to incorporate our IoT specs in more of their work.
arc
But they're not our specs. The XEPs they are referring to are expired and defunct
ralphm
Asking to move them to Active
ralphm
I don't want to go into the details in this meeting.
vurpohas left
ralphm
I think we should ask Council to provide guidance on how to move forward, and possibly appoint a liason to the IEEE for this work.
kaboomhas left
Lancehas joined
arc
+1
xnyhpshas left
xnyhpshas left
arc
third party people implementing defunct XEPs and pushing them as standards to other standards groups is a situation we need council to get on top of
SamWhited
With my council hat on (though I can't speak for everyone else of course) I think this is a matter for the IoT SIG to decide; if they want to improve the current XEPs, they will be reopened, if not, they can create new ones (possibly while working with the IEEE group)
vurpohas joined
SamWhited
But I do agree that if we *don't* want to improve the existing ones (and I think the consensus at the summit was that we don't), then we should definitely be careful to try and stop people from implementing them if there are known issues or we're not going to push them as official standards.
ralphm
I'm not sure if they really need these specs per se, but rather just XMPP-based ones.
MattJ
Hey, sorry, another meeting overran
arc
I'd like someone from board to reach out to Mr Miller re: XSF membership, they should have at least one person from their firm if they're implementing
dwd
With my Council hat on, the IoT SIG is subject to Council, so if Board asks the Council to Do Something, then I imagine Council will ask the IoT SIG and make a decision based on that input. But a Liaison as a first step seems sensible.
SamWhitednods
ralphm
And even though there is an IoT SIG, this is exactly why I wanted a Council person to be heading the IoT SIG
arc
he appears to be in Washington DC given his phone number. I'd be happy to reach out to him, have coffee with him, etc
ralphm
Sure thing.
Steve Killehas left
ralphm
SamWhited: can council at least work with Rikard and the IoT SIG to come up with a strategy?
ralphm
I don't think "we're throwing away the current specs" is a sensible approach to start interacting with IEEE
SamWhited
ralphm: That sounds sensible; I didn't mean to suggest that we shouldn't be involved. I'll add an agenda item for next week
Steve Killehas joined
SamWhited
https://trello.com/c/5SHoH80M
SamWhited
Done; comments can go there if you want us to discuss anything in particular next week.
ralphm
Who wants to formulate a response to William to kick off interaction with the IEEE?
ralphm
I'd like that to not wait until next week
dwd
Is that not Arc's coffee meeting?
ralphm
Maybe yes
arc
im not going to meet with him about IEEE as much as to understand what his firm is doing and explain what XSF is, encourage membership, etc
arc
leaving council issues aside, the part of the email that stuck out is he's speak from outside the XSF. and we really want implementors in the XSF.
dwd
I'd have thought that's a reasonable first response.
ralphm
arc: sure, we can to the actual IEEE liasoning or whatever later.
vurpohas left
arc
I think council does need to come up with a strategy for the iot stuff besides this
dwd
arc, Agreed.
vurpohas joined
ralphm
Yes, so that's part of what SamWhited's agenda item
ralphm
Any other comments on this?
MattJ
None here, sounds like a plan
ralphm
3. Discourse
Martin
Yep, sounds good to me
ralphm
nyco?
narcodehas joined
nyco
yes, the thread on the mailing list
nyco
also: Je pense
SamWhited
RE Discourse: If this is seriously being considered, I would like to have a(nother?) public comment period so that I can complain about what a terrible experience it is a lot. I won't waste time in the council meeting with it though.
I haven't read the discussion in great detail, but don't feel we have problem that needs resolving here
ralphm
on a technical level
nyco
we indeed have issues, that are worth admitting
nyco
Discourse is a great solution
arc
I'm not so hot on Discourse too, and agree with the sentiment that we should aim for an XMPP based solution
MattJ
I haven't used it, so can't really comment
arc
adding a new discussion media is a long term burden to the XSF that shouldn't be done lightly
nyco
we discussed quite extensively at the Summit around modernism
we lack this, like very badly
also, we should lower the barrier of entry
ralphm
I'm happy for people to play with this, but I'd hate to use this as a main thing for any of our current mailing lists before gaining significant experience.
jubalhhas joined
nyco
ralphm, mailing list is still there
MattJ
Maybe we could trial it for some discussion venues, but not others?
nyco
MattJ, IoT WG
ralphm
nyco: but not the mailman archives, right?
nyco
MattJ, also maybe if we wake the CommTeam back from the dead?
dwd
nyco, No, thanks. I'd rather it was used for jdev, or something else that's not a SIG.
nyco
ralphm, better archives, with real search that brings actual results, and tagging
SamWhited
Worth answering (but not necessarily right now): If we trial it for a WG, can we be sure that we can get to the archives later or move back to a mailing list if we decide not to use it long term?
ralphm
I a trial can be done without any changes in the current setup, as an add-on, I'm ok
SamWhited
(or anywhere really, but especially if it's an official function of the XSF like a WG)
ralphm
if
Flowlikes to point out that the IoT SIG would want to use discourse
ralphm
nyco: I'm sure everything is nicer, better, awesomer. I'd like to not have an disruption to the current setup.
ralphm
any
nyco
ralphm, agree
ralphm
Flow: I know, but I also don't want IoT to not be on an island. Especially not IoT.
nyco
mailman 2 is an island
nyco
we're all on it... :'(
dwd
How about setting up an entirely new discussion venue?
Valerianhas joined
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
ralphm
dwd: hm?
MattJ
That's kinda what I meant
nyco
dwd, yeah on Slack!
jubalhhas left
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
dwd
Create, say, a UX "list", but make it Discourse (or something) instead.
ralphm
Oh. In that case, something like SCAM would be appropriate
MattJ
Some measurement of success would be to ensure not just that the new system was used, but also that existing XSF members participated in it
ralphm
Right
arc
to quote the Zen of Python, "Now is better than never, Although never is often better than *right* now."
nyco
or not
MattJ
We don't want to throw out our existing community in an attempt to appear shiny to other groups of people
nyco
ity uccess, right?
arc
I want to reraise the issue that Discourse is not in any way XMPP based.
MattJ
I'd wager most of our existing community is just fine with the current setup (except searchable archives would be nice)
arc
this was a concern raised on the thread.
Flow
Look at Discourse as you would look at an upgrade from Mailman2 to Mailman3
ralphm
So the question becomes, who is doing it?
MattJ
arc, for that matter, mailman is in no way XMPP based :)
Flow
Nobody is throwing out the existing community by using Discourse
nyco
arc, so it mailman
nyco
is
arc
mailman is simply email. It doesn't use fancy realtime features more suitable to XMPP
MattJ
Flow, that sounds great - though I've heard conflicting opinions on whether that's true (I can't say myself as I haven't used it)
ralphm
We're in overtime.
nyco
we will attract non-members, which is good(tm)
ralphm
So, again, who's taking this on, and do what?
Flow
ralphm: I already volunteered
SamWhited
I've been using it for the past few weeks since this came up; I resubscribed to the rust-users list (which I unsubscribed from before a few weeks after they moved to Discourse) to see if things had changed. I turned on mailing list mode, and used it from my client. It was not a plesant experience.
nyco
let's just start to install it for IoT SIG
MattJ
SamWhited, concrete issues would be helpful to know (but not necessarily right here right now)
arc
I'm -1 on implementing this. I don't think a strong enough argument has been made for its need, and it could add a signifigant future burden to migration in the future
nyco
the current experience is less than pleasant
nyco
stuck in the past
nyco
we need that wave of modernism
nyco
well contemporarism
SamWhited
I think I outlined them on the list last time, but if this discussion starts up I'll go through and write out the individual pain points again.
ralphm
I'm -1 on implementing this for an existing group, and specifically for IoT
nyco
they want it
ralphm
They also wanted Skype for Business
MattJ
Let's (someone?) set up a new venue for starters, that's an actual first step
nyco
so you're saying what they want is irrelevant?
arc
nyco: I don't disagree with you that this would be good, the arguments against Discourse are on the merits of Discourse itself, not against innovative solutions
Steve Killehas left
ralphm
nyco: no, I'm saying that we as an organisation are responsible for it working properly
MattJ
Then after it's up, we can discuss moving venues to it at a later date
SamWhited
Not irrelevant, but also not the top concern; they may want it, but the rest of the XSF has to read this stuff too, and having archives will be important later. There are just more considerations than "they want it and it's shiny"
ralphm
and I think IoT has other, bigger issues
arc
nyco: I am not joining the IoT SIG exactly because of their choices of non-XMPP mediums for discussion.
Steve Killehas left
Flow
arc: We use Jitsi Meet since months
MattJ
I have no idea what work is currently being done in the IoT SIG, nor how to find out
MattJ
I didn't know it was still active
arc
exactly, MattJ
nyco
Discourse will make that visible... ;-)
MattJ
Mmmmhm
Flow
The visibility of Mailman2 mailing lists
Zash
Can you all pretend that I asked "Why?" to every statement in here?
danielhas left
Flow
I'm sure you can easily follow what happened in iot@ by reading the mailman2 archive
Flow
, not.
SamWhited
Why would Discourse make that any easier to follow?
ralphm
nyco: it wouldn't make it more visible. The last message before today was January 8
nyco
ralphm, yes, it would, that's one of the points
ralphm
https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/iot/
Flow
SamWhited: No subpages per months, as starter.
jubalhhas joined
ralphm
I can follow my e-mail client archives just fine, and I agree with MattJ
MattJ
Didn't the IETF have a nicer browser for mailman archives, if this is the issue?
SamWhited
Oh, I see, you're assuming the web interface. Yah, that's pretty bad, however, Discourse's non-web interface is pretty bad, so we're just trading one bad interface for another.
Flow
MattJ: That's one of the issues
MattJ
i.e. I'm sure existing work has been done in this area
nyco
ralphm, so can you with Discourse
ralphm
nyco: my point is that I don't believe non-movement in IoT is going to be solved by new technology for discussion
jubalhhas left
Steve Killehas joined
nyco
ralphm, true, but non-movement on our discussion means are killing
Flow
ralphm: As Guus what he thought about moving Openfire to github years ago. And read what he now writes in the ignite realtime blog
Ge0rG
Can't we just ask politely to add the list of affected xeps into the subject when posting to our lists?
Zash
There are prettier web frontends to mailing lists around, like Nabble, http://lua.2524044.n2.nabble.com/
Zash
So it's doable
SamWhited
That's different; GitHub is a central community with network effect. A Discourse instance isn't.
arc
I think the correct way forward on this is to have a discussion session for future-comms where multiple solutions can be discussed. Not simply a "I think we should move to X solution".
nyco
Zash, still ugly and old style, frightening
ralphm
arc: form?
nyco
SamWhited, to achieve network effect thanks to its value, then do lower the barrier of entry
SamWhited
nyco: However, for many it reduces value
arc
mailing list or a MUC chat
Flow
No, correct way to move forward is to do something. But within the XSF you will always find someone who is opposing that is why nothing happens ever.
nyco
SamWhited, I'm saying network value, Metcalfe's Law
nyco
Flow, agree, non-action hurts so badly
Flow
It was similar with the new xmpp.org homepage
nyco
don't give me the problem of resources
Flow
Simon also got yelled at for trying to move forward
nyco
the non-members, the external communities than we need so badly, will welcome that move
ralphm
Flow: ok, if you can set up Discourse in such a way that we *also* keep having archives in Mailman as we have now, you have my blessing.
ralphm
Is that possible?
arc
I'm ok with that, too.
nyco
why not disrupt?
nyco
are you doing nothing, to keep the comfort of a few?
Flow
ralphm: My idea was roughly to start with a test setup, and then switch one ML after another ot discourse and then eventually make mailman2 read-only.
dwd
nyco, You know that disruption isn't a means to an end?
nyco
dwd, ;-)
ralphm
Flow: ok, but can you run in hybrid mode?
arc
Flow: enough concerns have been raised to that, its not going to happen
Flow
We can always try to find someone to migrate the old posts to discourse if we want
Flow
arc: Concerns like?
nyco
arc, enough concerns have been raised to stay that way
arc
this isn't one person objecting. several people have concerns over the proposal
Flow
ralphm: hybrid mode?
nyco
arc, several people are all for it
nyco
if we want actual numbers, we can call for a survey
arc
something as fundamental as our communication medium affects everyone. for that, there should be rough consensus to change.
SamWhited
This isn't about numbers or a vote, it's about the people who are for it assuming that the burden of proof to show that this is a good idea is on everyone else and not addressing the valid concerns brought up by others on the list.
Flow
yeah, a members vote would be great thing to get a feeling what the XSF members think
SamWhited
(although I'm not against gathering numbers or data, of course, why not? Sounds nice.)
nyco
arc, the state of our current infra is affecting everyone, including the ones who don't join, because...
Flow
SamWhited: I think I've addressed most, if not all, concerns raised on the ML thread
dwd
Flow, I think running up a discourse instance with a real - but not critical - workload would be a sensible step.
dwd
Flow, We could also then try other options (Movim, maybe?).
ralphm
Flow: what I said before: if you can run it such that messages go to both Discourse and Mailman's archive, then please go ahead
ralphm
Same with other platforms
nyco
dwd, why Movim?
dwd
nyco, Why not?
ralphm
I want to stop this discussion as part of this meeting now.
nyco
dwd, because mailing list?
nyco
ok
arc
Flow: If I'm not mistaken, what you want is a more modern communications medium. Your chosen solution to that is Discourse. But other solutions could meet your needs. That is why we should discuss this in a new-comms meeting
sezuanhas left
nyco
arc, I have not seen any equivalent, please enlighten us
ralphm
please stop
arc
ralphm is right, we're way over time.
Flow
ralphm: Well I suppose you could do that with the help of your MTA. But I'm not sure if it's a good idea. What would be the advantage?
nyco
so, we end the meeting? or address the last agenda item?
ralphm
Flow: I want to either have a setup that doesn't involve current workgroups so we can test, evaluate, *or* something that doesn't affect the current infra
ralphm
(so that Discourse would just be an alternative interface)
nyco
I propose we put an end to that meeting
MattJ
Seconded
ralphm
nyco: I'm still at the office with a 2 hour commute ahead. I'm going to end this meeting
nyco
the neverending meeting may have a one-week pause
ralphm
I'm happy for people to keep discussing this afterwards
nyco
ok then thanks all! it was a great discussion!
ralphm
4. Date of next
ralphm
+1W
nyco
+1
ralphm
5. Close
ralphmbangs gavel
ralphm
Thanks all!
MattJ
Thanks
nyco
thx, see yah
arc
Thanks ralph
Martin
Thanks ralphm,
SamWhited
Flow: Yah, sorry, went back and looked, I never did send my concerns about it, so obviously you didn't reply to them :) will do that next time this comes up on the mailing list or whenever arc's comms meeting happens.
It's interesting how our experience divergates. Discourse has major traction within the open-source forum software. I find it very enjoyable on mobile and on my workstation, and I really like that I can use it just like mailman
ralphm
Flow: please don't feel discouraged. I am really curious about new things, but worried about inertia and continuity.
Zash
MattJ: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/
MattJ
Zash, I know. Source doesn't appear to be available?
MattJ
Can't find it
SamWhited
I'm pretty sure the disagreement is going to be starkly divided down the line of how it's used: If you use the web/mobile apps, it's very nice. If you use it as a mailing list, it's terrible.
Lancehas left
Flow
Well I already decreased my investment in XSF stuff, because it is nearly impossible to change something. Discourse on the other hand is something that I really think the XSF needs most right now. So it's the only thing I currently pursue
Flow
SamWhited: Did they run a version which included https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/74b6fe8739d86dc2284707e8507ac732420a1b8c ?
SamWhited
I still don't understand what benefit it gives us that a search box and a slightly nicer interface wouldn't
Just hat you can tag threads with the xep numbers is a huge win IMHO
SamWhited
Flow: That was one of the changes between last time and this time when I tried it, they did, and it was *much* better. But still a pretty terrible experience.
Flow
Looking forward to your elaboration what made it so terrible on members@ thread
SamWhited
(or at least, I assume that was one of the changes; that would explain a lot of the improvements around replying)
MattJ
Zash, well done
Steve Killehas left
jonaswhas left
Flow
Our Mailing List, especially standards@, is a huge pile of valuable information, yet it's not really accessible
SamWhited
It sends a bunch of garbage HTML, doesn't use conventions in the plain text version (and leaks some form of [bbcode] or something into the plain text), it sends different "topics" from different email addresses so it's hard to write filters (though admittedly, this sounds like it could be how the rust-users and rust-internal instances were configured), off the top of my head. There were others; replies were broken somehow still, but I don't recall now, I'd have to go look.
MattJ
Flow, Discourse won't fix that unless it can import the archives (can it?)
Flow
Sure you can. You just probably need to write the code doing so
Flow
But I think 1. that there are many mailman2 instances upgrading to discourse, so it's only a matter of time until someone does write that code
SamWhited
What's wrong with this IETF thing? It looks nice and would fix the accessibility problem (assuming we can get the source from them, which I'm sure we could)
arc
Flow: again, I think decoupling the specific solution you've chosen to champion from the needs to be addresed is a good first step
Flow
and 2. we can always do the import later
SamWhited
What arc said
Flow
yeah, i'm already sold on discourse for various reasons
Flow
so I don't need to decouple that
SamWhited
You do if you want to convince anyone else
Flow
true, but not everyone
Flow
IMHO Discourse is without alternatives and the best horse to bet on
arc
that's not a great position to bring to a discussion like this.
Flow
why not? I try to back my claims with arguments. And I'm happy if you convince me of an different alternative
Zash
Flow: Take this: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6778 s/IETF/XSF/ and call it a day ;)
arc
I haven't made a decision yet. What you're feeling as push-back is against the "right now" aspect to your drive. XSF has used MUC and email forever. The board, council, and most WGs use these.
arc
The first part of the push-back is the expediency, people have said that the case hasn't been made to why these things have to change right now.
ralphmhas left
MattJ
Well to be fair, if not "right now" then it'll be never, based on experience :)
arc
"Now is better than never, although never is often better than *right* now"
SamWhitedhas left
blipphas left
winfriedhas joined
arc
that comes from the python-dev list. very (very) often people comes through saying that X or Y or Z is mission critical, that Python is driving away potential new users because it doesn't have a feature, or a change to the C-API is absolutely necessary or they couldn't use Python, etc
arc
in almost every case decisions made "right now" are regretted.
SamWhited
Maybe someone (don't really care who, but it probably shouldn't be someone who's completely against Discourse like me, or completely for it like Flow) should evaluate several options and report back instead of us just making it an argument about "discourse or nothing". Other options have been thrown out, but the gist of the argument has mostly been about moving to discourse, not about improving in general.
arc
MattJ is right, we need to act on it or it'll be forgotten. So Flow and nyco have ruffled feathers, people are activated, lets sit down like engineers and sort out what we want to do
arc
I have questions as to MIX - in 2 years when we're all using MIX instead of MUC, will it be possible to merge our chat conversations with mailing list conversations in a meaningful way
Guushas left
Guushas joined
nyco
The timeline may be of a lesser importance here
Zash
Merging slow, long form communications with quick, short form comms is probably not very easy in non-technical ways.