tuxDid I get this right: Psi(+) does not support OMEMO because this kind of encryption is forbitten in Russia?
tuxhttps://github.com/psi-im/plugins/issues/10
tux*forbidden
zinidno
Guushas left
mimi89999What?
zinidrion is full of shit there
tuxSo the real reason is more the lack of willing developers ...
zinidyes
stefandxmhas left
tuxack
zinidhas left
jerehas joined
Guushas left
jubalhhas joined
Ge0rGhas left
jerehas left
jerehas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
jubalhhas joined
Tobiashas joined
sonnyhas joined
stefandxmhas joined
Martinhas left
stefandxmhas left
efrithas joined
Ge0rGhas left
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas joined
jubalhhas joined
stefandxmhas joined
efrithas left
efrithas joined
Guushas left
Ge0rGhas left
jubalhhas joined
Ge0rGhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
jjrhhas left
jjrhhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
Ge0rGhas left
jjrhhas left
jjrhhas left
jubalhhas left
Tobiashas joined
Martinhas joined
jubalhhas joined
ralphmhas left
nycohas joined
mimi89999has joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
mimi89999has joined
jubalhhas left
Ge0rGhas left
lovetoxhas joined
Tobiashas joined
jjrhhas left
la|r|mahas left
la|r|mahas joined
Ge0rGhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
jjrhhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
Ge0rGhas left
Ge0rGhas left
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
ralphmhas joined
Ge0rGhas left
Neustradamushas left
efrithas left
Neustradamushas joined
efrithas joined
efrithas left
efrithas joined
Ge0rGhas joined
Flowhas joined
jerehas joined
Ge0rGhas left
efrithas left
efrithas joined
efrithas left
efrithas joined
efrithas left
efrithas joined
edhelashas left
Yagizahas joined
edhelashas joined
efrithas left
efrithas joined
jcbrandhas left
Ge0rGhas left
jerehas joined
mimi89999has left
tuxhas left
la|r|mahas joined
Ge0rGhas left
la|r|mahas joined
tuxhas left
lskdjfhas joined
lskdjfhas joined
jerehas left
jerehas joined
jcbrandhas joined
mimi89999has left
Ge0rGhas left
peterhas joined
efrithas left
la|r|mahas left
la|r|mahas joined
tuxhas left
tuxhas left
lskdjfhas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
Ge0rGhas left
sonnyhas joined
dwdhas left
sonnyhas joined
lskdjfhas joined
Ge0rGhas left
stefandxmhas left
Guushas left
Ge0rGhas left
Tobiashas joined
ralphmhas left
edhelashas left
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
edhelashas joined
andrey.ghas left
edhelashas left
edhelashas joined
Guushas left
Guushas joined
Ge0rGhas left
waqashas left
andrey.ghas joined
tuxhas left
Guushas left
ralphmhi
Guushas joined
GuusBoard meeting?
Ge0rGETA -5 min?
Guushas left
waqashas joined
Guushas joined
GuusI got Ralphs "hi" after my last message, but according to Conversations, it was sent more minutes ago?
moparisthebestGuus, according to gajim his "hi' was 5 seconds before your "Board meeting?" message
danielhas left
GuusMy client said 5 minutes
ralphmWeird
ralphmI sent it at 18:05:06
ZashThis week on the XSF Board; time travel.
ralphm(CEST)
Ge0rGhas left
danielhas joined
Ge0rGGuus: your message was delayed, so probably you were not properly synced to the MUC at that time.
moparisthebestmy conversations and gajim both agree with ralphm's time, I think your client is messed up Guus :)
MartinI'm here, not sure who else is…? Also, yeah my client's doing something odd
Ge0rGStill, board meeting?
ralphmI haven't detected quorum yet
MattJI'm here
ralphm17 minutes in
ralphmAre there any pressing matters this week?
MattJI don't know how pressing it is - Guus requested approval of his logo fix
Ge0rGMy issues don't have a deadline, so feel free to skip board meetings until the next re-election.
jubalhhas joined
ralphmGe0rG: thanks for that
Ge0rGralphm: I'm sorry. Venting at the present board members about the absence of the non-present ones is highly inappropriate.
ralphmGe0rG: Well, I've been absent quite a few times, too. Doing volunteer work is hard some times, and so is attending (weekly) meetings. That said, I don't feel that we are doing a bad job in general. Most of the work in this organisation is around protocols and that's why we have Editors and Council.
MattJFWIW, I feel like we're doing a bad job
goffihas left
Zashhas left
Ge0rGralphm: I think I'm repeating another person's point, but it's up to the board to decide how often to meet, and at which time.
GuusI've written at length about this, without response. Cannot elaborate again now, driving.
ralphmMattJ: ok
SamWhitedThere have been several times where people have needed things from the board and the board did not show up for several weeks in a row. That feels like a problem to me.
SamWhited(or rather, where a small subset of the board didn't show up; the people in this room tend to be the ones that are on top of things I think)
Ge0rGThe last board meeting was very intense and very productive, though. It didn't cover all the points, but still.
peterhas left
GuusAgreed
ralphmSamWhited: sure, attendance can be a bit spotty, and from experience especially around summer leading into the autumn.
jubalhhas left
ralphmLast week was indeed nicely productive
GuusTheta now is quorum, please meet?
Ge0rGhas left
ralphmbangs gavel
ralphm0. Welcome + Agenda
ralphmHi all
MattJHi ralphm
danielhas left
MartinAhoy
danielhas joined
ralphmI understand one of the topics is Guus' request to change the XMPP logo.
ralphmanything else pressing?
GuusSee trello
ralphmGuus: thank you, but that's not what I asked
MartinThere is a trademark question on Trello we didn't get to last week
ralphmOk
Ge0rGand the SPAM WG question
ralphmLet's see how far we get.
ralphm1. XMPP Logo
MattJ+1 to Guus's changes
sonnyhas joined
ralphmI know there's been some differing opinions on this and if Board can decide on this.
jerehas left
jerehas joined
ralphmhas left
ralphmhas joined
GuusKev is -1, most others that expressef opinion +1
MartinI'm OK with Guus' changes
ralphmWasn't the logo initially voted upon by the membership?
sonnyhas joined
GuusI'm suggesting a small improvement, not a new logo.
ralphmGuus: I don't see the difference, to be honest, procedurally, I mean
ralphmI don't see a need to change the logo myself, but I'd like to make sure that we do it right.
Guusralphm: original vote if any was between different styles
moparisthebestthe email went out to the membership, presumably everyone who cared already commented?
Steve Killehas left
Steve Killehas left
ralphmmoparisthebest: that's not the way things work in foundations in general. Either Board can decide, or the membership in a general meeting.
sonnyhas joined
ralphmIn the mean time, I've been trying to find background in how this logo came to be, but haven't yet found the details.
Guusralphm: it is in my pr
GuusIncluding feedback of original designer
moparisthebestif you don't know the right way to do it, just do it, and if anyone complains worry about it then?
Ge0rGhas left
ralphmGuus: yes, I saw that
ralphmI meant that some of the links in the e-mail threads there are dead and I couldn't get all the context.
ralphmI'm +0 on this change and I would like to request the two other directors to vote on this, too.
ralphm2. Trademark Policy Fees
ralphmI read the card on Trello. My question is: for which application is this a problem that we need to fix?
ralphmIs this about the fee for last week's approved application?
Ge0rGralphm: no, it's about potential applications that are scared away by the Trademark
ralphmSo there are no concrete cases about people not applying because of this fee?
Ge0rGralphm: not as far as I know.
Ge0rGralphm: obviously, there is no way to know about all the people who haven't applied because they got scared away.
ralphmMattJ, Martin do you see this as a problem we need to fix?
ralphmGe0rG: to be honest, if I saw a fee that was inhibiting, I'd try to ask what's up with that
Ge0rGralphm: I've heard from many people, mainly from the OSS movement, that Trademarks Are Evil and that Jabber Is Evil etc. and I want to streamline the process as far as possible.
ralphmIt is not that we *need* the fee itself, but one of its (initial) functions was deterring frivolous applications, i think.
MattJTo be honest this still seems reasonable to me
Ge0rGWe have effectively deterred most applications.
ralphmI'm not sure if people that think that Trademarks are evil and by extension the Jabber mark, will start using the name if the fee is $0
Ge0rGralphm: I'm not sure about that either. I only have a slight hope.
ralphmIt is still a trade mark
Ge0rGYes :(
Flowhas left
Steve Killehas left
ralphmI have seen two out of three present directors not seeing a need to change this, so I have to decline the request for change at this time.
ralphmMartin?
Ge0rGralphm: is your position that there is nothing we can do to revive the Jabber term?
ralphmnot at all
MartinI agree with you ralphm: it's still a trademark, and we can always approach/waive it on a per-case basis
Ge0rGMartin: the board has to decide about applications on a per-case basis anyway.
jubalhhas left
sonnyhas joined
ralphmGe0rG: I fact, I strongly believe it is possible to start using the Jabber mark for a marketing effort to attract people using XMPP-based chat. I do think, though, it would be good for such an effort to include the people managing the jabber.org service, and it also doesn't necessarily need to happen through the XSF.
Ge0rGralphm: I believe that as a prerequisite, we need to simplify the trademark usage guidelines as far as possible, and that removing the fee is a useful step in that direction
ralphmI disagree
Ge0rGhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
Ge0rGralphm: with which parts of my statement?
ralphmall of it
ralphmin the interest of time, moving on
ralphm3. SPAM working group
ralphmWas this meant as a request to form a SIG?
ralphmMartin: I see you added this, so I assume you know. But I think what should happen is that somebody writes a XEP for this.
Ge0rGI'm not sure what the formal type of group is. I'm looking for a closed-membership group that can coordinate and devise a strategy before going public.
MartinDangerous assumption. Given most don't have access to add cards in Trello, I added it on request.
MattJI'll note that there was some concern (I don't remember who from) about the group being closed
ralphmyeah, that bugs me too
jonaswI think discussing anti-spam techniques publicly is not necessarily a good idea
ralphmsure
MattJThe problem is that if they aren't open, they can't be implemented by operators
ralphmRight
MattJUnless we form a small "special" federation of operators
moparisthebestit's just an arms race, discussing in private will at best delay them a bit, at least in public you can come up with things that can't be evaded
MattJIf that's going to happen, operators are free to do that, but I don't know if that's something that should/needs to involve the XSF resources
ralphmwhich doesn't require any XSF involvement (same as the operators list doesn't)
Ge0rGI'd like to have a small closed group for testing and strategy, that communicates and provides hints to other operators in a semi-public way
moparisthebestdoesn't sound very federated
ralphmGe0rG: right, so I don't think you need the XSF for doing that
Ge0rGralphm: I hoped to get XSF blessing at least ;)
danielhas left
danielhas joined
ralphmGe0rG: like XMPP, the community is federated, we don't need the XSF to be at the nexus of it all
SamWhitedIf this group is using XSF infrastructure (servers, mailing lists, etc.) I would personally like it to be public. I would want to follow along.
waqashas left
ralphmGe0rG: you seem to assume this in all of the things you talk about, but I think a better approach is to find like-minded people and just start doing things
ralphmThe operators list is a great place to start this
MattJI agree with Ralph. And count me in as a like-minded person (who has some non-public anti-spam projects)
ralphmyay
MattJI just don't think the XSF being involved in such a group is necessary or a good thing
ralphmSo looking at the clock, I'm going to close this
Lancehas joined
MattJBut if that group ever needed something from the XSF, we can discuss that
ralphm4. Next Meeting
ralphm+1W?
Martin+1W is ok with me
ralphmMattJ: indeed
ralphm5. Close
ralphmThanks all, sorry about starting late.
Ge0rGThanks very much for the feedback.
ralphmbangs gavel
MattJThanks ralphm :)
Martinhas left
ralphmI also forgot to ask someone to write minutes :-(
Lancehas left
MattJI can go over the log and send some out
ralphmMattJ: ☺
jubalhhas joined
sonnyhas joined
GuusTx for extended meeting
Ge0rGhas left
jonasw+1
Steve Killehas left
Steve Killehas joined
Ge0rGhas left
nycohas left
nycohas joined
jabberatdemohas joined
stefandxmhas joined
jabberatdemohas left
ZashMattJ: Can you explain what the deal is with https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html#example-23 ?
ralphmhas left
Zashiq-set returning stuff is pretty uncommon
jonaswZash, I find it logica
jonaswZash, I find it logical
jonaswIt returns the actually applied preferences, which may be different. that’s less racy and less RTT than requiring the client to query it again after setting
ZashThere's still the race of another resource changing stuff between your iq-get and -set
Ge0rGhas left
stefandxmhas left
jonaswhas left
Guushas left
mimi89999has left
Guushas joined
ralphmhas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
jabberatdemohas joined
Yagizahas left
Guushas left
jabberatdemohas left
Guushas joined
Guushas left
Guushas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
jcbrandhas left
Lancehas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
Ge0rGhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
stefandxmhas joined
Guushas left
Guushas joined
winfriedhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
waqashas joined
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
SamWhitedhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
fp-testerhas left
ralphmhas left
Guushas left
Guushas joined
Guushas left
Guushas joined
ralphmhas left
Guushas left
SamWhitedhas left
Guushas joined
MattJZash, we have that race all over XMPP
ZashMattJ: Rosters and blocking would like to have a word with you
MattJYou think there's no race there? What?
ZashIt'll tell you if something changes
MattJI agree that a push method for preferences may be (have been?) nice
ZashAnd those also deal in deltas, not the complete things.
MattJBut that doesn't solve the race in any way
ralphmhas left
ZashWhat exact race?
Lancehas left
MattJYou'll never know if another resource has a conflicting change in flight, or a push is already in-flight to you
uchas joined
ZashMattJ: The mam-prefs fixes that?
MattJNo, I'm saying that it's no worse
ZashAnd you'll notice eventually if there was a roster or blocking thing in flight.
ZashYou *could* fix that by having a reference to the current version (as you see it)
ZashAnd then you can build a blockchain on that!
MattJThat's why I said push would potentially be nice
MattJBut it doesn't solve a real problem in any way
ZashIt's already an established pattern
MattJThere's little difference between push vs. pull
MattJI agree, in hindsight maybe adopting the same model would have been better
MattJIt's a little more complex, but clients are used to it (well, they should be)
SamWhitedhas left
SamWhitedhas left
SamWhitedhas left
ralphmhas joined
ZashMattJ: Was that in the very earliest drafts? Or, how could I have missed it all this time?
ZashI remember asking why it wasn't using the common push pattern at some point, but not having seen that it reflected the data back in iq-set.
Alexhas left
la|r|mahas left
MattJafaik it's always been this way
moparisthebestIt's almost as if the various xeps were written by different people :)
moparisthebesthas joined
peterhas joined
peterhas left
ralphmhas joined
jerehas joined
jerehas joined
Guushas left
jerehas left
jerehas joined
Guushas joined
Guushas left
Guushas joined
zinidhas left
jubalhhas left
Zashhas left
jerehas left
jerehas joined
tuxhas joined
jjrhhas left
lovetoxhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
jjrhhas left
ralphmhas left
jjrhhas left
jjrhhas left
Tobiashas joined
sonnyhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
valohas joined
Zashjonasw: found the thing that originally produced xeps.xml: https://q.zash.se/ef274a7e18fc.txt (grep for botsFile)
XSF Discussion - 2017-09-20