ralphmSteve Kille: yes, that's why I said: you can have multiple different identities and disco extension forms in one result.
Dave Cridlandhas left
ralphmNot convinced yet you need node='mix' "to make this work".
jonas’indeed, merged information could work just as well
ralphmThe problem I have with the current solution is that I can't just discover from an unknown JID that it is a MIX room. I'd have to know, somehow, for the MIX specific information.
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
alacerhas joined
jjrhhas left
labdsfhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Steve Killeralphm: I don't have time to look at the MIX spec this week and consider this point. I will review next week. Shall I respond in the MUC or by email to the list?
ralphmI was already drafting it
Steve Killeta
Dave Cridlandhas left
equilhas joined
Alexhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
alacerhas left
lnjhas joined
mimi89999has joined
Alexhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
danielhas left
ralphmTo be found at https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2018-September/035355.html
Steve Killeralphm: ta. Will respond next week
ralphmCool
karphas left
karphas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
apachhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
equilhas left
Alexhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas joined
neshtaxmpphas joined
Alexhas joined
j.rhas joined
equilhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
Valerianhas left
Marandahas joined
MarandaSamWhited: battery usage reduction with heavy muc usage is consistent between 50-60% on my device with those optimizations using Conversations btw
Ge0rGMaranda: what optimizations?
MarandaI just had to adjust the queue max buffer amount to make it less detrimental to notifications as well
ralphmhas left
Ge0rGI don't understand
ralphmhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
MarandaGe0rG: gimme the time to type will you?
Maranda🤸♂️
Ge0rGMaranda: sorry, I misunderstood your sentence as a response to my question. If only we had threads!
Dave Cridlandhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
karphas left
MarandaGe0rG: presence deduplicated queuing, filtering of bodyless message payloads, and queuing of all groupchat type messages except mentions basically (anything not meeting criterias triggers a flush)
MarandaGe0rG: that's the optimization
Dave Cridlandhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Ge0rGMaranda: okay, nothing surprising here. What's the baseline you are measuring against?
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Maranda(CSI obviously)
Ge0rGMaranda: also do you flush MUC OMEMO immediately?
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Ge0rGMaranda: CSI is not a baseline, it's a signaling mechanism
jonas’(the "(CSI obviously)" was obviously not meant in response to your baseline request)
jonas’(because it had parenthesis and doesn’t make sense as an answer)
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Ge0rGMaybe I should remove myself from the discussion then, I fail to process what I'm reading.
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
MarandaGe0rG: for now I just tested on my server and gathered numbers from my own usage as I said, hard to find people willing to be sample subjects 😜
Ge0rGMaranda: you make a prosody module, I deploy it.
MarandaGe0rG: 😆
nycohas joined
lhas joined
Zashhas left
ralphmhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Ge0rGhas left
Steve Killehas left
Steve Killehas left
MarandaI implement both (part of) SIFT and CSI in the same module while Prosody has several submodules hookin' on mod_csi so I'd have to look if porting of portions of the current code is viable
Yagizahas left
Ge0rGMaranda: what do you need SIFT for?
alexishas left
Alexhas left
MattJHa, SIFT
MarandaGe0rG: allowing clients to decide which stanzas to filter but since there're 0 implementations as usual I guess: "nothing"
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas joined
Zashhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas joined
alexishas joined
lhas joined
MarandaSIFT was supposed to replace part of the featureset provided by Privacy Lists afair
Dave Cridlandhas left
Alexhas joined
Yagizahas left
Valerianhas joined
mrdoctorwhohas joined
muppethhas left
muppethhas joined
Valerianhas left
j.rhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
!xsf_martin> Maranda: you make a prosody module, I deploy it.
Me too
mrdoctorwhohas joined
lnjhas left
lnjhas joined
jjrhhas left
j.rhas joined
jjrhhas left
j.rhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
labdsfhas left
labdsfhas joined
lhas joined
Alexhas left
Zashhas left
j.rhas joined
j.rhas joined
tuxhas joined
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
alacerhas joined
Alexhas left
j.rhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
lhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
mrdoctorwhohas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
tuxhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
Yagizahas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
mrdoctorwhohas joined
lumihas joined
apachhas left
apachhas joined
neshtaxmpphas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
j.rhas joined
Zashhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
equilhas left
equilhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
j.rhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
j.rhas joined
ralphmhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
alacerhas left
Alexhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
ThibGhas joined
Tobiashas left
ThibGhas joined
Tobiashas joined
muppethhas left
muppethhas joined
muppethhas left
alexishas left
muppethhas joined
alexishas joined
alacerhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
ThibGhas joined
ThibGhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
alacerhas left
jjrhhas left
j.rhas joined
Alexhas left
Neustradamushas left
alacerhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
lhas left
lhas joined
nycohas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
alexishas left
alexishas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Yagizahas left
pep.> Ge0rG> Maranda: sorry, I misunderstood your sentence as a response to my question. If only we had threads!
haha.
MattJjonas’, results were posted here quite a while back
MattJCurrent discussion is what actions to take based on the results
jonas’oh
jonas’I must’ve missed them
jonas’were they also posted to members@?
MattJIt's nearing the end of this term, but it would be good to get a head-start with some recommendations for the next Board
jonas’if not, posting them to members@ would be nice
MattJNot sure, if not I can dig them up in a bit
ralphmSince we're kind of there:
MattJThe minutes should have linked to them, but our minutes have been a bit sketchy as of late
ralphm1. Survey
Guus(back)
ralphmI read the summary on the Trello ticket. Seems reasonable.
j.rhas joined
MattJYeah, I think we generally agreed with that. Concrete actions are harder to recommend
ralphmExcept I think the Board's first priority is always what is listed as 2 here: Organisation (9) => bureaucracy, funding
MattJA lot of things circle back to our finance situation, at the end of the day
ralphmFor 3 (standards development) we have Council and Editors
MattJI think the key is for Board to enable these things to happen
ralphmI am indeed not sure what Board specifically can do itself for the other two points.
ralphmRight
ralphmWe'd still need other people to make thing happen. E.g. I am really happy with the newsletter by JC and others
MattJWell I think the big thing the survey highlighted for me is that everyone agrees there should be more IRL events
ralphmSo basically we need to spice up SCAM
MattJpep. organised an unofficial hackathon, which was great... and hopefully we will have some more
MattJIt was unclear whether these events can draw from SCAM, so I think that is one thing we can discuss
GuusActually, the should be
MattJI'm not even sure it's unclear to me, just that it could be more explicit
Guus(able to draw from SCAM)
ralphmWell, at least for promotion
Guusbut we have not much of protocol nor history, which makes it hard for people to know what to expect from SCAM
MattJI don't want to speak for pep., but for example I suspect it could be clearer what process he would have needed to go through
ralphmif there are things needed, like materials, why not see if the XSF can help out there
MattJI think things turned out just fine as they were (Collabora sponsored it generally), but for future reference at least it would be good to get this more organised
nycoI think and believe we (XSF) should let go some stuff
I mean software
we are a bunch of low level developers, doing low level stuff, like protocols
we are not bad at it (could be better, always)
I think and believe we need to catalyse higher steps in the software stacks
like bring in developers who are not protocol-minded or protocol-oriented
we need software developers who are into better UX and UI
we need to test and improve things end-to-end
it may be time to revive "Modern XMPP"
except there should be no "XMPP" in the title
because once again that focusses on the protocol
let's focus on chat and chat alone, start from here, improve things, one step at a time
GuusAgreed - it's on one of my many to-do lists (with SCAM hat on)
Guuswhat do you mean with "letting go software" ?
MattJnyco, "Modern XMPP" (if you refer to my talk some time ago) is not dead, nor is it an XSF activity
nycoI know
edhelasXMPP 2.0
MattJand since it targets developers, neither should it be rebranded (though a user facing brand is a separate issue that the XSF may or may not want to tackle)
ralphmnyco: yes, I think the XSF remains primarily a standards organisation, and there's always been debate if we can/should be at the center of development
nyconot "XMPP 2.0", because it focusses on the protocol
ralphmWe made a more or less explicit choice here when we went from Jabber Software Foundation to XMPP Standards Foundation.
nycoXSJ used to be JSF
nycooh the glorious days
MattJThere is a lot of uncertainty about the Jabber trademark... some people use it, some refuse to
Guusralphm: I don't understand, or see that debate. We're not developing software as the XSF - apart from some tooling for our own benefit?
nycowe can start an informal movement, see where it goes
Ge0rGralphm: was it an explicit decision back then?
ralphmGuus: well, for example, should we promote certain implementations?Tthat's what has come up numerous times.
Ge0rGnyco: do you have the man power for that?
nyconot the XSF
MattJralphm, the survey fairly clearly indicated that people value the XSF's neutrality
GuusRalphm: but we do not, and agreed recently to will not change that.
nycoGe0rG that's what I am working on
ralphmGe0rG: from my recollection, yes
Yagizahas left
ralphmGuus: indeed, and I think that supports what nyco said in his wall-of-text
Ge0rGI've called out for a new Jabber Software Foundation to care about UX and branding and supporting developers for some years now.
nycoGe0rG I know, let's just do it
ralphmJust like our protocol is distributed, there's no reason for a software organisation to exist next to the XSF
GuusI'm not against people doing things like that - but that'll be out of scope of the XSF, won't it?
MattJGe0rG, calling out helps a lot :)
Guus(so by all means, go for it, but lets not make it a topic here?)
MattJralphm, assume you meant "not to exist"
ralphm*not* to exist
nycothere's no reason for a software organisation NOT to exist next to the XSF
nycoGuus indeed, I think it is out of the scope of the XSF, not the XSF to decide
ralphm(well, we got that clear, phew)
MattJI think everyone agrees with this, and pep. and I have been looking into it a little
ralphmI have some ideas, too, but not as part of the XSF indeed.
Guusif we all agree that this is not a matter for the XSF and thus its board - let's move on? 🙂
MattJYep :)
nycoyes
ralphmSo, going back to the topic, we can conclude that we *do* want to continue supporting community events
ralphmFor now, I'm looking forward to FOSDEM again.
pep.Sorry I'm at work, can't follow all this, I'll try to reply later if necessary
GuusFOSDEM + summit
ralphmAs a FYI: the real-time peeps have requested a Realtime Devroom again, and I will do the same for the Lounge
ralphm2. FOSDEM + Summit
MattJThanks ralphm
ralphmGuus: let's get kicking for this, hopefully preparing better and getting more people there
Guusagreed
ralphmIdeas welcome, of course
Guuslet's do that in SCAM context
Guus(I want to ping Seve about some of his ideas he had last year)
ralphmscam@muc.xmpp.org as always
Guusagreed
ralphm3. Elections
GuusWhen is our tenure over?
ralphmIt is September again, so I guess we need to invoke Alex to start up the process
ralphmEarly November I think
Guusok
ralphm4. AOB
ralphmAnything else?
nycoPOSS ?
nycoParis Open Source Summit
nycoor next meeting?
Guusnyco, take that to SCAM?
ralphmSCAM first indeed
Guusno need for the board to decide on that, I think?
XSF Discussion - 2018-09-20