jonaswMaranda, requesting the config form is a smart thing to do, because usually you want to offer configuration to the user.
Dave Cridlandhas left
Timhas joined
Lance Stouthas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Lance Stouthas joined
alexishas left
Guushas left
alexishas joined
ralphmhas left
ralphmhas joined
Lancehas joined
Valerianhas joined
sezuanhas left
sezuanhas joined
Guushas left
rtq3has left
marmistrzhas left
alexishas left
alexishas joined
marmistrzhas left
mrdoctorwhohas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Guushas left
Guushas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
alexishas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
alexishas joined
Lancehas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Chobbeshas left
Chobbeshas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
winfriedhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Guushas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
rionhas joined
marmistrzhas left
rtq3has joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
jubalhhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Yagizahas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
ludohas left
ludohas joined
pep.has joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
marmistrzhas left
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
remkohas joined
alexishas joined
SaltyBoneshas left
alexishas joined
ludohas left
ludohas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Guushas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
jubalhhas left
rtq3has left
danielhas left
Guushas left
Kevhas joined
SaltyBoneshas left
edhelashas left
Marandajonasw, for muc? I'm not sure the end user will know what to do with it also as MattJ said if something does it like Gajim does you may end with an undefinitely locked room
edhelashas joined
KevWhy not just do what Swift does?
winfriedhas left
Kev"[x] Automatically configure new rooms"
MarandaAnd regarding subject I decided to send it after the room is unlocked
ZashSensible defaults? Never!
MarandaKev, or just request an instant room
KevWe didn't even have that to start with, but we had people who required reserved rooms.
winfriedhas left
KevMaranda: I think that's not one of the two obvious readings of the spec :)
MarandaI think lovetox is more incline on auto requesting an instant room though
MarandaEven because if you cancel the config form the room has to be destroyed ™️
Zash> undefinitely locked room
say what?
winfriedhas left
MarandaYes
MarandaUndefinitely locked room
Dave Cridlandhas left
marmistrzhas left
jonaswi think you meant: indefinitely
MarandaWhatever
Guushas left
MarandaI'm an illiterate english wise 😜
ZashKeep a timestamp and unlock or destroy it on some timeout?
SaltyBoneshas joined
MarandaPossible, but how much time and what happens if the user just creates the room and goes to pick up a coffee (leaving the config form open)
MarandaThat's not too silly either
MarandaAs example
ZashMeasure how long it takes to fetch coffee
Ge0rGUnlock the room if the user leaves prior to finishing configuration
jonaswallow to create rooms by just submitting a config form to a MUC JID?
edhelashas left
nycohas left
MarandaOr join and just request an instant room
MarandaIt's already provided
Steve Killehas left
Ge0rGI think instant rooms are underspecified in 0045
Steve Killehas left
edhelashas joined
MarandaGe0rG well I didn't even know about all this mess before yesterday, and/or I suppose my brain could've just removed it because it's too messy
Steve Killehas joined
Ge0rGMaranda: so I made you have nightmares about MUC? Yay.
@Alacerhas left
@Alacerhas joined
MarandaAbout all this locking mess yeah it's horrible UX wise, but I have to care about the protocol not UX ultimately
Alexhas joined
rtq3has joined
@Alacerhas left
@Alacerhas joined
danielhas left
@Alacerhas left
@Alacerhas joined
winfriedhas left
la|r|mahas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
Yagizahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
marmistrzhas joined
marmistrzhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Guushas left
danielhas left
Guushas left
Timhas joined
Zashhas left
rtq3has left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Timhas joined
Guushas left
Zashhas left
Valerianhas left
ralphmhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas left
goffihas joined
ralphmhas joined
SaltyBoneshas left
Martinhas joined
jonaswdoes gajim 1.x still do resource locking?
Martinhas left
Martinhas joined
la|r|mahas joined
Guushas left
Guushas left
MarandaI suppose, never experienced chat disjoints (yet)
jonasw:/
Guushas left
Yagizahas left
Yagizahas joined
sezuanhas left
Guushas left
Valerianhas joined
tahas left
tahas left
tahas joined
Guushas left
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
Ge0rGMaranda: what? you put protocol over UX?
jonaswas a server deve, I think that’s a valid argument ;-)
MarandaGe0rG, shiny things is your thing mine is the rubbery below that..? 🤷♂️
Maranda😘
Ge0rGMaranda: if the protocol goes against UX, it needs to be ignored and/or repaired.
MarandaIndeed but since there's a standard I have to abide to that
MarandaUntil it's fixed ™️
Ge0rGMaranda: there are server devs in this MUC who have ignored the standard to improve UX
Ge0rG> Until it's fixed ™️
So did you submit a PR? An XEP?
MarandaSubmit a PR to muc?
jonaswsure
MarandaI would remove the locking mechanism completely and leave instant rooms while I understand the reasons below it
MarandaI can already see a lot of people voting against it
MarandaI know
nycohas joined
MarandaBut that's what it would be
lnjhas left
MarandaAnd then I'd need some editor to re edit it and make it comprehensible for the masses too.
Marandaeyes jonasw?
Maranda🤣
Ge0rGMaranda: you could collaborate with an editor
tahas joined
tahas joined
jonaswthe way pubsub does it would be cool. create a room by sending a config form along. if the room exists -> conflict, if it doesn’t exist -> configure as specified by the client (if possible, otherwise error)
Ge0rGjonasw: for instant rooms, I'd argue that the server should assign a room name.
MarandaYes that's indeedly a better solution
Ge0rG<iq to=chat.yax.im><gimme-a-room-pse>
jonaswgah
Ge0rGs/room name/room JID/
Marandajonasw's for sending the config form, but then rooms aren't persistant by default
MarandaSo we get into an implementation issue
jonasw…?
jonaswthe client would send a config form with persistent set to treu.....
jonaswgotta go
Tobiashas joined
MarandaAnd what about non persistant members only rooms mr. "jonasw gotta go“ 🤨
Marandale sighs
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
jonaswMaranda, what?
jonaswthe client can request whatever it needs?
jonaswI don’t see your problem.
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
MarandaThat a non persistant room to exists needs someone in it, that's what all the locking junk is about
MarandaSo what I said above applies as issue in your solution
jonaswthis joins and creates the room
jonaswand configures
MarandaOk that could work 😁
jonaswI don’t see the problem with that.
jonasw:)
jonaswand it’s atomic, which is neat
jonaswmuch better than MUC logging
jonaswwtf
jonaswwhat did I just write
jonaswlocking is what I meant
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
jonaswI need lunch, gotta go now for real
goffihas left
goffihas joined
goffihas left
la|r|mahas joined
Tobiashas joined
Marandajonasw your "work like in pubsub" didn't trigger the "publish-options" example in my head (which fits more than "create-and-configure" and won't apply for non persistant)
rtq3has joined
Marandas/and won't/that won't/
goffihas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas left
lumihas joined
SaltyBoneshas left
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
rtq3has left
Yagizahas left
MarandaAnd well GC1.0 breaks spim blocking horribly for mucs
Ge0rGMaranda: does it?
Tobiashas joined
Marandaneeds to add additional tracking.
MarandaYes
MarandaAnd I sense a tip of <sarcasm/> there Ge0rG 😜
danielhas left
Ge0rGMaranda: and I sense a large pinch of generalized statement.
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
MarandaGe0rG muc private messages, I track directed presences with the x element atm
MarandaI'll have to track all directed presences using bare instead but that's a bit more expensive
Tobiashas joined
MarandaOn GC1 private messages will break mod_spim_block
MarandaAtm
Yagizahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
Ge0rGMaranda: don't you have to track all directed presences anyway?
Ge0rGMaranda: the funny part is when you try to join a nick as `Maranda`, but the MUC tells you that you joined as `Dumbass` instead. It will break both most clients and presence tracking!
Ge0rGjoin a MUC
Ge0rG(no offense intended)
danielsource for 'it will break most clients'
Ge0rGdaniel: maybe yours is a notable exception, but please don't generalize that.
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
danieli'm just wondering if you actually experienced clients breaking on this?
Ge0rGI know of two that will be broken.
Ge0rGwith different degrees of brokenness.
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
KevServers changing MUC nicks will certainly break things. How much things break might vary, but it'll screw things up.
KevYou need both your client to understand it sensibly and your server to do unspecified things.
Ge0rGKev: I think there are two different cases here; a MUC telling you that you joined with a different nickname, vs. changing your nickname later on
ralphmhas joined
danielmaybe sometimes you need to break things to have nice things
danielsomething something omelettes
danielbut it's pretty reckless to have the renaming in 45 w/o a way for the client to signal that it will be able to process that
Kev45 is broken in many interesting ways.
Ge0rGdaniel: yeah, but we can solve that. Just have the MUC service keep a mapping of (actual client nickname <-> what the client thinks its nickname is) and add some renaming on conflicts
Ge0rGso if my client thinks I'm `Ge0rG`, but I'm actually `Not_Ge0rG` in the MUC, when the real `Ge0rG` sends a groupchat message, I will see it as coming from `The_other_Ge0rG`. Easy!
Tobiashas joined
jonaswwhatthefuck
SaltyBoneshas left
pep.Sorry I haven't done the minutes of the gdpr meeting yet :(
jonaswI might have a conflict next tuesday, my boss is looking to sort this out.
pep.k, we can move if necessary I guess
jonaswif and only if this conflicts, I’ll be available on wednesday instead of tuesday.
Dave Cridlandhas left
Martinhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Martinhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
alexishas left
alexishas joined
danielhas left
Timhas joined
ralphmhas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
alexishas left
alexishas joined
@Alacerhas left
@Alacerhas joined
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas joined
@Alacerhas left
@Alacerhas joined
rionhas joined
Guushas left
alexishas left
SaltyBoneshas left
SaltyBoneshas joined
alexishas joined
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
Guushas left
SaltyBoneshas left
la|r|mahas joined
tahas left
Tobiashas joined
jerehas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Martinhas left
jerehas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
lnjhas joined
jerehas joined
winfriedhas left
blablahas left
nycohas left
Tobiashas joined
nycohas joined
mimi89999has left
la|r|mahas joined
@Alacerhas left
@Alacerhas left
Guushas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
jonaswconflict resolved
Dave Cridlandhas left
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
SaltyBoneshas joined
la|r|mahas left
Martinhas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
@Alacerhas left
@Alacerhas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Guushas left
Tobiashas joined
ludohas left
ludohas joined
Martinhas left
Tobiashas joined
Martinhas joined
Martinhas left
Guushas left
Guushas left
SaltyBoneshas left
Tobiashas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Martinhas joined
Martinhas left
Martinhas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
lnjhas left
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
lskdjfhas joined
Ge0rGAh, minutes are in. Always a pleasure to read.
ralphmhas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
la|r|mahas joined
Martinhas left
Martinhas joined
jubalhhas joined
ludohas left
ludohas joined
Timhas joined
rtq3has joined
moparisthebesthas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
danielhas left
xnyhpshas joined
xnyhpshas joined
sezuanhas left
Zashhas left
Timhas joined
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
rtq3has left
rtq3has joined
Zashhas left
Timhas joined
tahas joined
waqashas joined
alexishas left
alexishas joined
marmistrzhas left
winfriedhas left
mrdoctorwhohas left
Yagizahas left
andyhas left
andyhas joined
efrithas joined
Yagizahas joined
Guushas left
andyhas joined
winfriedhas left
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Guushas left
andyhas left
andyhas joined
lnjhas joined
lnjhas left
lnjhas joined
MattJ.
GuusI'm here
Guus(but in a meeting)
MattJEnding soon?
MattJNyco sent apologies
Guusgod knows ...
MattJI know the kind :)
Dave Cridlandhas left
GuusI can lurk here
MattJMartin, around?
MartinYup, sorry, chat window popped onto the wrong monitor
andyhas left
andyhas joined
andyhas left
MattJI haven't heard anything from Ralph
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Guushas left
Guuscan any of you start off?
GuusI have to pay some attention to this meeting 😕
nycohas left
MattJPinged Ralph but no response. I'm not sure of the value of starting with 2.5 members present - unless you want to be counted as a 1
MartinI agree, probably a better idea to defer until next week
nycohas joined
Dave CridlandAnd then there were four. Or maybe 3.5.
GuusOk, meeting over 🙂
MattJOk
MattJLet's do what we can
MattJ0) Role call
GuusI'm here!
MattJMe, Martin, Guus
MattJnyco, sent apologies (but is here if he wants to retract them)
MattJAnyone have anything for the agenda?
Guus(nope)
MattJAnyone free to take minutes?
Guus<--
MattJThanks!
MattJNo decisions to make this week, it seems
MattJ1) Commitments
MattJ1.1) Membership survey
MattJI've converted the survey to a Google Form, you can take a look here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdZL6iNYhLJCTWYg3vZ_2XEC5dYrzeQuZtaJZ3OdJFL2UwFpQ/viewform
Ge0rGMattJ: there is an item to decide, https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/425
GuusCan I fill that out as a test/
Guusor will my responses be inrevocable?
MattJFeedback welcome. Main open questions I think we need to decide: should it require an email address? (I say yes), and who should the survey be for? XSF members only? or the community at large?
MattJGuus, feel free
Tobiashas joined
Guusif we're doing this for members only (my preference), I'd make change the email field in a name field.
MattJand if we opt for members-only, potentially verification
MattJGe0rG, is that with your GDPR hat on? ;)
Ge0rG(maybe we should discuss the details off-meeting)
Ge0rGMattJ: not only
Ge0rGMattJ: if somebody asks me for my email, I want to know why.
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
MattJOk, we can discuss. I'd like to send the form out before the next meeting
MattJWe're short on time, so let's move on
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Guusas I said: I think a member-only thing is most suitable: if only because we know these people to have some affection with XMPP.
Guusand with that, an email is not 'needed' (as we know who you are)
MattJGuus, I worry that may exclude some valuable opinions (the XSF may be a bit of a bubble)
MattJFor example, lots of memberships have lapsed - we might be able to learn why
Guusfair
Guusok, you won me over
MattJ1.2) Online swag shop
MattJNyco sent some details to the board list
jerehas joined
MattJIf we go ahead, I'd opt for not having any up-front costs
winfriedhas left
Guusperhaps first decide if we do want to go ahead?
MattJI think last week we agreed on going ahead with the research
winfriedhas left
MattJResearch is done (?)
SamWhitedhas left
Guussure
MattJWhat reasons are there to not go ahead?
winfriedhas left
MattJI can't think of any, it's essentially an experiment though
Guus(I don't have any major ones, but so far, it's only been three people talking about this)
MartinDo we know who'd come up with the creative elements? Or would we just use existing logo assets?
winfriedhas left
MattJMartin, I assumed the latter, but that's a good point - we may want to do more than that (as we have done for FOSDEM in the past)
GuusMartin: I think this'd be best served by the comms team, but possibily scam as well?
winfriedhas left
MattJBut then someone has to volunteer to do that
Ge0rGthere might be taxation issues for the XSF
winfriedhas left
Ge0rGwhoever is responsible for the XSF tax forms should be asked first.
winfriedhas left
Guusthat's sensible
MattJI assume it's no different to selling t-shirts at FOSDEM, but we probably should
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas left
GuusPeter, as the Treasurer (and general -has-been-around-forever-and-knows-everything-) might be able to help here
MattJGuus, do you want to add it to your list? :)
winfriedhas left
Guusk
MattJThanks
MattJSo let's do that, and push the final decision on this off for another week when hopefully we'll have more voices
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas left
marmistrzhas left
MattJ1.3) Collect information on the role and responsibilities of the executive officer
Guushas left
MattJMartin, any success with this so far?
Zashhas left
MartinUnfortunately not. I'm about to leave one job and start another one, so my week's just been eaten up. Sorry.
xnyhpshas joined
MattJThe title of the card is inaccurate, we're specifically discussing the Executive Director role
Guuschange it? 🙂
MattJShall do
winfriedhas left
MattJ2) Items for discussion
MattJGuus, financing - ongoing I believe?
winfriedhas left
Guusyeah, i've send out emails (cc'ed board), but no responses so far.
MattJNoted
Guusother than that, i've not started anything on the subject myself.
MattJOther item is ED search which is blocked on the other task
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas left
MattJ3) We've hit our time, does anyone have important AOB?
MattJGe0rG highlighted that PR about Pidgin
winfriedhas left
MattJI haven't read it yet, and don't really know what's going on, so I'd rather push that to next week
GuusI've commented on that in the PR
MattJand maybe give some feedback in the interim
MattJOk
Guusno AOBs from me.
MattJ4) Date of next
winfriedhas left
MattJ+1w
MattJ5) Close
Guuswfm
MattJThanks all!
Guusthank you!
MartinThanks MattJ
winfriedhas left
lumihas joined
winfriedhas left
xnyhpshas joined
MattJGe0rG, ok, I see the issue. The neutrality issue is actually in the community survey so that might provide some data on what people would like to see here
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
MattJPersonally, I'd be fine with including it if we had the right markings next to it indicating that it is not up to date with the latest protocols
Valerianhas left
MattJBut down that road lies a whole kettle of worms
Ge0rGMattJ: I know. I'm not the one asking easy questions :P
MattJSomeone needs to determine what the compliance level is. If it's self-reported, someone needs to verify that
Guushas left
MattJ(or do they really? Probably some competitor will submit a PR to fix it and we'll need to resolve the dispute :) )
Ge0rGWe don't have compliance level requirements.
Ge0rGBack when introducing the new policy, I wanted to make it more clear that only application authors are allowed to submit their respective application.
Ge0rGHowever, even that opinion was controversial.
jjrhhas left
MattJIt's hard to enforce, would be my main concern
MattJIn open-source projects the line isn't always clearly defined
ZashAre only application authors allowed to?
MattJIf someone submits a couple of patches, are they allowed?
MattJIf they only maintain the documentation, are they allowed?
ZashOr if they are on the inofficial marketing team by speaking positively about your project at least once? :)
MattJThis is why that plan to have XMPP projects host some metadata on their domain would be the best option
ZashBut if the current situation is that project authors won't even bother submitting a one line patch, who's going to motivate them to author such a metadata file?
MattJThe people who are currently trying to submit the projects to us :)
GuusI'm not a fan of restricting applications to that JSON file
Ge0rGWe as the XMPP community have a huge quality issue. We won't solve it by having "inofficial marketing volunteers" submit zombies to The Official Client List
MattJGuus, why so?
GuusBecause being the one that created the app doesn't uniquely qualify you to add it to our list.
GuusHell, I think I've added a couple of clients on there.
ZashAlso, me, being against forcing people onto singular platforms, feel meh about it being done by github pr.
Ge0rGZash: you can send .diff files
GuusWhy would we limit our list by denying entries from enthousiastic users that are not devs?
jjrhhas left
Ge0rGGuus: because enthusiastic users don't know whether their favorite client is actually good for the general audience.
MattJGuus, it depends entirely on the purpose of the list
Alexhas joined
Ge0rGAt least less so than the developer.
MattJI think you and Ge0rG have different opinions on that
GuusIt's up to us to merge or reject the PR.
Guusso quality control is up to us. I'd be happy for anyone to offer suggestions for us to put on those lists.
jjrhhas left
ZashWas the purpose of the renewal not to filter out inactive projects.
Ge0rGZash: yes
ZashPidgin is not an inactive project, even it's not moving very fast.
Ge0rGGuus: what kind of quality control do you want to apply, that doesn't violate the Holy XSF Neutrality Stance.
jjrhhas left
GuusGe0rg: a judgement if the entry is appropriate. I've denied stuff before.
Ge0rGGuus: judgment on which grounds?
Guuslemme think
Ge0rGGuus: I agree with you that we want quality clients there. But we need to have some formal grounds for that
Martinhas left
Guusi think I denied at least two, because they were XMPP-based silos (that did not federate)
GuusOh, but then we disagree 🙂
MattJFWIW I had multiple conversations with ex-XMPP users who had moved to other platforms because XMPP can't do $feature
GuusI don't think quality is a requirement.
MattJWhen it turns out they were Pidgin users, and don't even have Carbons
Guusas that's subjective, at times.
Guusexactly, lots of people are happy with Pidgin, even fi we're not
MattJand this has given me the opinion that Pidgin is harmful to XMPP, as it stands
Guusso I'wouldn't mind adding it
MattJNo, these people left XMPP because of Pidgin
Seve/SouLMaybe gathering a minimum of XEPs implemented?
Ge0rGGuus: except that pidgin makes your XMPP experience break in unexpected ways if you add another client
Seve/SouLfor IM.
Ge0rGSeve/SouL: like the Compliance Suite?
MattJPidgin is extremely popular (whether we list it or not)
MattJand for a significant number of XMPP users, it *is* XMPP
Ge0rGPidgin and Zom on top of Cisco Jabber.
MattJXMPP does not support Carbons or MAM if Pidgin does not support Carbons or MAM
GuusMatt, that's why I think we'd better list it, but with some kind of footnote.
Valerianhas joined
Ge0rGwe need a traffic light, and pidgin will be red.
Guushas left
Ge0rGexcept colorblind.
Seve/SouLGe0rG, I don't know how many active/good clients would the Compliance Suite exclude, but yes.
Something like 'minimum decent experience'.
This way we even could list clients that have these features or more, and 'others' that do not, like Pidgin or whatever.
jjrhhas left
Valerianhas left
Ge0rGAs long as yaxim ends up on the "good" side, and Pidgin on the "bad" one, I don't care :P
jjrhhas left
Valerianhas joined
Seve/SouLHeh
blablahas left
GuusSeve, I largely agree. I do think we should prevent the qualification to be very strict or detailed though, as it'll lead to too much discussion
Ge0rGSeriously though, the list on xmpp.org is intended for people who don't have an XMPP client yet.
Guusbut a simple stoplight type of deal would owrk.
Ge0rGI can't see any rational reason to tell them about Pidgin, except not to use it.
jjrhhas left
jjrhhas left
GuusI think that it does add value for many people, even if it does not for you.
Ge0rGGuus: what kind of value do you thin it adds?
Ge0rGGuus: what kind of value do you think it adds?
jjrhhas left
GuusGe0rG whatever makes the gazillion people that use it for XMPP today think of it.
ZashMaybe have an Subjective Persons Pick of the Week thing before the full list?
GuusAlso: if people see it on that list, and are used to pidgin, but see that there are many better clients (by looking at that traffic light), they might be motivated to explore what better things are out there.
MattJZash, and in 4 weeks we run out of clients ;)
Ge0rGGuus: ask jonasw what he thinks of it.
ZashSomeone (read: Ge0rG) could review clients and post under a big "NOT THE OFFICIAL BLAH OF THE XSF" banner on the blog
GuusGe0rG: I'm not disputing that it's lacking
Ge0rGZash: I'd be the Angry VideoGaming Nerd of XMPP clients.
Dave Cridlandhas left
Marandahas joined
MarandaGe0rG yes but they're normally tracked with the full jid so I need to make another table that contains bare and I didn't want to do for non muc cases I guess I'll have to make a third one just in case
Ge0rGhi Maranda! Your message came in 4 hours late.
Dave Cridlandhas left
marmistrzhas left
MarandaI know i was without data
MarandaI exhausted credit
Ge0rGGuus: as long as we don't have a formal mechanism to put clients into "good", "bad" and "ugly" lists, and the appropriate tooling on the web site, I'm strongly against putting pidgin onto the list.
GuusGe0rG: my formal mechanism is your gut. 🙂
Ge0rGWikipedia has huge tables of XMPP clients, sortable by criteria and listing some "important" aspects.
MarandaAnd exhausted it just I was typing said message too
Maranda😎
Seve/SouLListing 'Minimum decent experience' clients and 'others', could even motivate client developers to work on their client.
This way we can add to the list more clients and also specify which ones you should choose first.
If adding clients to the list is what we aim for.
GuusGe0rG: i don't want to keep that kind of detailed data on our site. That'll be always out of date, and lead to too much bickering. Just a "good/bad/ugly" qualifier that's based on whatever the XSF member(s) in charge of the list semi-objective thought on the matter is, is good enough for me.
Zashsemi-objective in a semi-official place is weird tho
GuusZash: better than the alternative, perhaps
Ge0rGGuus: so you and jonasw disagree, we'll have an edit war?
GuusGe0rG: no, because we're sensible people.
Guus... at least jonas is.
Martinhas joined
Ge0rGI wish that'd be true for all XSF members.
GuusI think we can strive to an acceptable compromise on a 1to3 level of things.
la|r|mahas joined
Guusgiven the semi-objectes arguments based on compliance levels, I don't think there'll be much discussion between the highest and lowest levels anyways, so compromising should be doable.
Guuswe're not having an edit war now, do we? And we both have the ability to add/remove pidgin today. 🙂
xnyhpshas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
ZashCertified Approved by Guus, Ge0rG or jonasw on arbitrary subjective grounds™
GuusZash: I'll order that in rubber stamp format.
ZashI'll order a tiny "Zash approves" rubber stamp to stamp on those stamps.
Ge0rGI don't think there are any clients that would deserve the "Approved by Ge0rG" stamp.
Guusinstead of the compliance levels, we could have "things that Ge0rG complains about a lot / sometimes / hardly ever."
danielhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Ge0rGGuus: I like that.
GuusWe would require you to complain to some degree on everything on the list then, though.
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
Ge0rGSomeone will have to provide me with the required devices to run the shit to complain about, then.
ZashMaybe do a community survey on rankings?
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
Guus"shit doesn't run on my device" is a valid complaint.
Guusoh shit, kids
Guusneed to pick them up
Guusbyes! 🙂
j.rhas joined
danielhas left
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
marmistrzhas left
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
danielhas left
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
marmistrzhas joined
j.rhas joined
j.rhas joined
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Valerianhas left
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas joined
la|r|mahas left
j.rhas joined
la|r|mahas joined
jjrhhas left
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
blablahas left
Valerianhas joined
Guushas left
alexishas left
tahas left
Timhas left
@Alacerhas left
@Alacerhas joined
nycohas left
Neustradamushas left
Neustradamushas joined
nycohas joined
Guushas left
Timhas joined
Guushas left
efrithas left
Timhas left
Timhas joined
jjrhhas left
Timhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
rtq3has left
waqashas left
Guushas left
Lancehas joined
sezuanhas left
Guushas left
jerehas left
jerehas joined
peterhas joined
Lancehas joined
Guushas left
Guushas left
lovetoxhas joined
waqashas joined
Lancehas left
Lancehas joined
danielhas left
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas joined
SaltyBoneshas left
SaltyBoneshas joined
j.rhas joined
j.rhas joined
blablahas joined
jubalhhas left
SaltyBoneshas left
SaltyBoneshas joined
rtq3has joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
SaltyBoneshas left
tuxhas joined
danielhas left
Timhas joined
marchas left
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
Guushas left
marmistrzhas joined
valohas left
valohas joined
marchas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Martinhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
jonasw
Falling out of Debian's own wrangling with the upcoming EU GPDR
regulation, I thought it might be a good idea to have a cross-
community discussion group to discuss the GDPR and its impact on
free software and free culture projects.
This has now been setup here:
https://www.earth.li/mailman/listinfo/gdpr-discuss
Please feel free to pass the link onto other communities who would
be interested in participating.
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb, Debian Project Leader
`. `'` lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
XSF Discussion - 2018-04-12