Steve Kille: yes, that's why I said: you can have multiple different identities and disco extension forms in one result.
Dave Cridlandhas left
ralphm
Not convinced yet you need node='mix' "to make this work".
jonas’
indeed, merged information could work just as well
ralphm
The 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 Kille
ralphm: 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?
ralphm
I was already drafting it
Steve Kille
ta
Dave Cridlandhas left
equilhas joined
Alexhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
alacerhas left
lnjhas joined
mimi89999has joined
Alexhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
danielhas left
ralphm
To be found at https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2018-September/035355.html
Steve Kille
ralphm: ta. Will respond next week
ralphm
Cool
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
Maranda
SamWhited: battery usage reduction with heavy muc usage is consistent between 50-60% on my device with those optimizations using Conversations btw
Ge0rG
Maranda: what optimizations?
Maranda
I just had to adjust the queue max buffer amount to make it less detrimental to notifications as well
ralphmhas left
Ge0rG
I don't understand
ralphmhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Maranda
Ge0rG: gimme the time to type will you?
Maranda
🤸♂️
Ge0rG
Maranda: 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
Maranda
Ge0rG: 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)
Maranda
Ge0rG: that's the optimization
Dave Cridlandhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Ge0rG
Maranda: okay, nothing surprising here. What's the baseline you are measuring against?
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Maranda
(CSI obviously)
Ge0rG
Maranda: also do you flush MUC OMEMO immediately?
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Ge0rG
Maranda: 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
Ge0rG
Maybe I should remove myself from the discussion then, I fail to process what I'm reading.
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Maranda
Ge0rG: 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 😜
Ge0rG
Maranda: you make a prosody module, I deploy it.
Maranda
Ge0rG: 😆
nycohas joined
lhas joined
Zashhas left
ralphmhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Ge0rGhas left
Steve Killehas left
Steve Killehas left
Maranda
I 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
Ge0rG
Maranda: what do you need SIFT for?
alexishas left
Alexhas left
MattJ
Ha, SIFT
Maranda
Ge0rG: 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
Maranda
SIFT 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.
jonas’, results were posted here quite a while back
MattJ
Current 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@?
MattJ
It'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
MattJ
Not sure, if not I can dig them up in a bit
ralphm
Since we're kind of there:
MattJ
The minutes should have linked to them, but our minutes have been a bit sketchy as of late
ralphm
1. Survey
Guus
(back)
ralphm
I read the summary on the Trello ticket. Seems reasonable.
j.rhas joined
MattJ
Yeah, I think we generally agreed with that. Concrete actions are harder to recommend
ralphm
Except I think the Board's first priority is always what is listed as 2 here: Organisation (9) => bureaucracy, funding
MattJ
A lot of things circle back to our finance situation, at the end of the day
ralphm
For 3 (standards development) we have Council and Editors
MattJ
I think the key is for Board to enable these things to happen
ralphm
I am indeed not sure what Board specifically can do itself for the other two points.
ralphm
Right
ralphm
We'd still need other people to make thing happen. E.g. I am really happy with the newsletter by JC and others
MattJ
Well I think the big thing the survey highlighted for me is that everyone agrees there should be more IRL events
ralphm
So basically we need to spice up SCAM
MattJ
pep. organised an unofficial hackathon, which was great... and hopefully we will have some more
MattJ
It was unclear whether these events can draw from SCAM, so I think that is one thing we can discuss
Guus
Actually, the should be
MattJ
I'm not even sure it's unclear to me, just that it could be more explicit
Guus
(able to draw from SCAM)
ralphm
Well, at least for promotion
Guus
but we have not much of protocol nor history, which makes it hard for people to know what to expect from SCAM
MattJ
I 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
ralphm
if there are things needed, like materials, why not see if the XSF can help out there
MattJ
I 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
nyco
I 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
Guus
Agreed - it's on one of my many to-do lists (with SCAM hat on)
Guus
what do you mean with "letting go software" ?
MattJ
nyco, "Modern XMPP" (if you refer to my talk some time ago) is not dead, nor is it an XSF activity
nyco
I know
edhelas
XMPP 2.0
MattJ
and 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)
ralphm
nyco: 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
nyco
not "XMPP 2.0", because it focusses on the protocol
ralphm
We made a more or less explicit choice here when we went from Jabber Software Foundation to XMPP Standards Foundation.
nyco
XSJ used to be JSF
nyco
oh the glorious days
MattJ
There is a lot of uncertainty about the Jabber trademark... some people use it, some refuse to
Guus
ralphm: I don't understand, or see that debate. We're not developing software as the XSF - apart from some tooling for our own benefit?
nyco
we can start an informal movement, see where it goes
Ge0rG
ralphm: was it an explicit decision back then?
ralphm
Guus: well, for example, should we promote certain implementations?Tthat's what has come up numerous times.
Ge0rG
nyco: do you have the man power for that?
nyco
not the XSF
MattJ
ralphm, the survey fairly clearly indicated that people value the XSF's neutrality
Guus
Ralphm: but we do not, and agreed recently to will not change that.
nyco
Ge0rG that's what I am working on
ralphm
Ge0rG: from my recollection, yes
Yagizahas left
ralphm
Guus: indeed, and I think that supports what nyco said in his wall-of-text
Ge0rG
I've called out for a new Jabber Software Foundation to care about UX and branding and supporting developers for some years now.
nyco
Ge0rG I know, let's just do it
ralphm
Just like our protocol is distributed, there's no reason for a software organisation to exist next to the XSF
Guus
I'm not against people doing things like that - but that'll be out of scope of the XSF, won't it?
MattJ
Ge0rG, calling out helps a lot :)
Guus
(so by all means, go for it, but lets not make it a topic here?)
MattJ
ralphm, assume you meant "not to exist"
ralphm
*not* to exist
nyco
there's no reason for a software organisation NOT to exist next to the XSF
nyco
Guus indeed, I think it is out of the scope of the XSF, not the XSF to decide
ralphm
(well, we got that clear, phew)
MattJ
I think everyone agrees with this, and pep. and I have been looking into it a little
ralphm
I have some ideas, too, but not as part of the XSF indeed.
Guus
if we all agree that this is not a matter for the XSF and thus its board - let's move on? 🙂
MattJ
Yep :)
nyco
yes
ralphm
So, going back to the topic, we can conclude that we *do* want to continue supporting community events
ralphm
For 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
Guus
FOSDEM + summit
ralphm
As a FYI: the real-time peeps have requested a Realtime Devroom again, and I will do the same for the Lounge
ralphm
2. FOSDEM + Summit
MattJ
Thanks ralphm
ralphm
Guus: let's get kicking for this, hopefully preparing better and getting more people there
Guus
agreed
ralphm
Ideas welcome, of course
Guus
let's do that in SCAM context
Guus
(I want to ping Seve about some of his ideas he had last year)
ralphm
scam@muc.xmpp.org as always
Guus
agreed
ralphm
3. Elections
Guus
When is our tenure over?
ralphm
It is September again, so I guess we need to invoke Alex to start up the process