XSF Discussion - 2018-01-13

After a verification on xmpp.org, I found that the list has been changed, in the past when I managed the list, it will be more important. Psi and Psi+ have not in list, why? https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html

http://psi-im.org/ + http://psi-plus.com/

Really strange for historical XMPP clients

Metronome is not listed too on https://xmpp.org/software/servers.html https://metronome.im/

It was before ;)

Neustradamus: they adopted an annual renewal policy

And apparently those weren't renewed

edhelas, la|r|ma: FYI this is the conversations fork that does webrtc audio and video https://github.com/spreedbox/Spreedbox-Android

But requires this server for signaling https://github.com/strukturag/spreed-webrtc/

la|r|ma: also do you still have that dino audio code

moparisthebest, interesting...

edhelas, is it normal I see movim c2s connection on my server even though I closed movim yesterday?

zinid yes it stays open 12 or24h normally

edhelas, ok

except if you disconnect

disconnect? I have already disconnected 🙂

disconnect what?

I can only kill the session on the server

closing the tab != disconnect

It's awesome how the debates about avatar XEPs and bookmark XEPs got mixed up on standards@ now.

I'll just store my avatar in private XML from now on.

I'm thinking about just retracting the compliance suites and letting someone else deal with it; it's all good discussion, and some of these changes need to be made, but we'll never have compliance suites if we keep bike shedding forever and don't just put *something* through every year. By the time we finally reach consensus the goal posts have shifted and there are newer things that need to be added (like the avatar crossover XEP, which is fantastic, but didn't exist when the compliance suites should have been voted on)

*grumble, grumble*

There's basically no point to compliance suites if they can't be published in a timely manner, even if they're not perfect.

SamWhited: it was a very unfortunate timing, both with the council election and the holiday season. It's really great that you have kept up pushing this, and I'm really sorry that it didn't work out as intended. I think you are doing a really good job despite all the setbacks you encountered.

I appreciate it; thanks.

I fully agree with Ge0rG.

but I’d like to mention that as the timings currently are, this will affect all compliance suites

if anything, it’s going to get worse for the next few years if elections continue to shift

jonasw: what direction do they shift in?

laterness

IIRC

(I haven’t checked; I just thought that someone mentioned that during last election season)

jonasw: that's making things better, as soon as the election happens after new year's eve.

yeah, but that’ll take some time

Maybe it would just be better to have the next Compliance Suite ready by Dec 1st.

by the end of council term?

Hm.

I think I had these ready and was trying to get a vote before that, but yah, apparently it needs to be even earlier

Doesn't matter though; earlier next year is easy, this year is my concern.

And then there are the moments where the gremium can't meet due to unforeseen events.

SamWhited, as mentioned in council@, if you and kev can agree, it doesn’t matter what the community thinks (even if that seems harsh). If it’s councils decision that vcard/avatar/private-xml/pep things shall be resolved in the next suites and for now we say "you’ll need both" (or whatever solution you come up with), it can be voted on next meeting I think

Yeah, just let the list discussion go on and merge Kev's PR <https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/569>

should i mention that you can't implement 223 right now?

because it will just get rejected by the server

because of the unregistered publish-option

What if some new xep0001 changes were voted in just for compliance suites, they are published as is on Jan 1st regardless or something

force-accepting it at the end of each council term?

Simply don't restart votes?

Flow, you mean we should remove the passage from XEP-0001 which states that outstanding votes by outgoing council are to be re-voted on by incoming council?

jonasw, yep, that's what causing trouble again and again. Simply announce the voting, and the council at the time of the announcement has X days time to vote

that seems reasonable

maybe bring that up with board?

jonasw, unlikely, not a top priority for me, but I would support it

Zash: yes if not accepted before, Jan 1st is drop dead date