XSF Discussion - 2018-12-13

  1. ThibG has left

  2. vanitasvitae has left

  3. vanitasvitae has joined

  4. oli has joined

  5. goffi has left

  6. UsL has joined

  7. jjrh has left

  8. jjrh has left

  9. jjrh has left

  10. dos has left

  11. vanitasvitae has left

  12. vanitasvitae has joined

  13. efrit has joined

  14. lskdjf has left

  15. jjrh has left

  16. neshtaxmpp has joined

  17. lskdjf has left

  18. lskdjf has joined

  19. blabla has joined

  20. efrit has left

  21. vanitasvitae has left

  22. vanitasvitae has joined

  23. ThibG has joined

  24. jjrh has left

  25. jjrh has left

  26. lskdjf has joined

  27. tom has left

  28. moparisthebest has left

  29. moparisthebest has joined

  30. waqas has joined

  31. Zash has left

  32. thorsten has left

  33. thorsten has joined

  34. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  35. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  36. dos has left

  37. l has left

  38. l has joined

  39. Yagiza has joined

  40. Nekit has joined

  41. jjrh has left

  42. jjrh has left

  43. rion has left

  44. l has left

  45. l has joined

  46. Nekit has left

  47. Nekit has joined

  48. moparisthebest has left

  49. oli has joined

  50. flow has joined

  51. oli has left

  52. oli has joined

  53. l has left

  54. l has joined

  55. Nekit has left

  56. Nekit has joined

  57. lumi has joined

  58. l has joined

  59. l has joined

  60. l has joined

  61. l has joined

  62. l has joined

  63. labdsf has left

  64. l has left

  65. Tobias has joined

  66. ThibG has left

  67. ThibG has joined

  68. lorddavidiii has left

  69. valo has left

  70. valo has joined

  71. lorddavidiii has joined

  72. nyco has left

  73. nyco has joined

  74. oli has joined

  75. jonas’ has left

  76. jonas’ has joined

  77. genofire has left

  78. waqas has left

  79. waqas has joined

  80. andy has joined

  81. Wiktor has joined

  82. labdsf has joined

  83. edhelas has left

  84. edhelas has joined

  85. blabla has joined

  86. MattJ has joined

  87. Steve Kille has left

  88. Steve Kille has left

  89. Steve Kille has joined

  90. marc_ has joined

  91. lumi has left

  92. marc_ has left

  93. Steve Kille has left

  94. mimi89999 has joined

  95. ThibG has left

  96. Steve Kille has joined

  97. ThibG has joined

  98. waqas has left

  99. goffi has joined

  100. oli has left

  101. oli has joined

  102. Guus has left

  103. Alex has joined

  104. blabla has left

  105. blabla has joined

  106. Guus has left

  107. vanitasvitae has left

  108. vanitasvitae has joined

  109. vanitasvitae has left

  110. vanitasvitae has joined

  111. vanitasvitae has left

  112. vanitasvitae has joined

  113. Alex has left

  114. mimi89999 has joined

  115. blabla has left

  116. blabla has joined

  117. mimi89999 has joined

  118. goffi has joined

  119. vanitasvitae has left

  120. vanitasvitae has joined

  121. vanitasvitae has left

  122. vanitasvitae has joined

  123. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  124. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  125. lskdjf has joined

  126. vanitasvitae has left

  127. vanitasvitae has joined

  128. lumi has joined

  129. thorsten has left

  130. vanitasvitae has left

  131. vanitasvitae has joined

  132. thorsten has joined

  133. goffi has left

  134. 404.city has joined

  135. goffi has joined

  136. Alex has joined

  137. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  138. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  139. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  140. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  141. ThibG has joined

  142. ThibG has joined

  143. pep. has joined

  144. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  145. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  146. vanitasvitae has left

  147. vanitasvitae has joined

  148. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  149. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  150. vanitasvitae has left

  151. vanitasvitae has joined

  152. marc has left

  153. Steve Kille has left

  154. Steve Kille has left

  155. Steve Kille has joined

  156. Steve Kille has left

  157. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  158. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  159. Alex has left

  160. lskdjf has joined

  161. lskdjf has left

  162. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  163. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  164. lskdjf has joined

  165. Zash has left

  166. matlag has left

  167. Steve Kille has left

  168. Steve Kille has left

  169. Zash

    Hm, memberbot doesn't tell me what I'm voting for

  170. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  171. Zash

    Huh, xhtmlim bug?

  172. ralphm

    Worked fine for me (Conversations).

  173. Zash

    Not a client issue it seems

  174. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  175. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  176. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  177. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  178. efrit has joined

  179. ta has joined

  180. Zash

    It's sending <b> and <i>. Those aren't allowed per https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0071.html#def-text

  181. jonas’

    that should only lead to them not having any effect

  182. jonas’

    I think?

  183. jonas’

    unsupported tags should be replaced with their content

  184. ralphm


  185. Zash

    I can't do that.

  186. ralphm


  187. ralphm

    That's the most basic of HTML handling

  188. jonas’

    although I’d argue that disallowed tags ≠ unsupported tags and disallowed tags should be dropped altogether. however, I’d go with replace with content even for disallowed.

  189. ralphm

    Ignore what you don't know

  190. ralphm


  191. Zash

    No, I'm saying that my sanitizing code can't do that.

  192. jonas’

    although one could argue that disallowed tags ≠ unsupported tags and disallowed tags should be dropped altogether. however, I’d go with replace with content even for disallowed.

  193. Zash

    It's not possible to replace tags with text.

  194. Zash

    It must replace tags with tags or nothing.

  195. ralphm

    So you found two bugs

  196. Zash

    Now, the real question is: Where does the plain text <body> go?

  197. jonas’

    Zash, it’s even worse, you need to be able to replace tags with mixed content

  198. jonas’

    if you get sent <p>something <b>foo<i>bar</i>baz</b> something</p>, the result should be <p>something foobarbaz something</p> (assuming p is allowed)

  199. ralphm

    If a client supports XHTML-IM, it will ignore the body

  200. Zash

    But there was no <body>

  201. Zash

    or a message at all

  202. Zash

    I only received the "Approve (yes/no)" messages and I don't see where the others went

  203. ralphm

    I'd check out the bot and try out. I'd be surprised if it didn't send body

  204. Zash

    Lookl like Link Mauve already noticed this and https://github.com/linkmauve/memberbot/commit/4f539b8571c48f84129c284517f6bb692352247e

  205. ralphm

    Also note the body

  206. Zash

    Sure, but I didn't receive those at all for some reason

  207. marc has joined

  208. Zash

    So either my firewall ate them or my XHTML-IM filter ate them

  209. jonas’


  210. lorddavidiii has left

  211. lorddavidiii has joined

  212. alacer has joined

  213. genofire has left

  214. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  215. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  216. alacer has left

  217. alacer has joined

  218. moparisthebest has left

  219. alacer has left

  220. andy has left

  221. vanitasvitae has left

  222. dwd

    Afternoon, all.

  223. ralphm

    hi dwd

  224. ralphm set the topic to

    XSF Board Meeting | Logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/ | Agenda https://trello.com/b/Dn6IQOu0/board-meetings

  225. ralphm bangs gavel

  226. ralphm

    0. Welcome + Agenda

  227. ralphm


  228. ralphm

    Who do we have?

  229. nyco


  230. Guus


  231. ralphm

    dwd asked us to discuss Compliance Suites, so there might be some Council members around to join for that item.

  232. Seve

    Hello :)

  233. dwd

    All things are possible.

  234. ralphm


  235. Guus

    You can summon MattJ by mentioning him...

  236. dwd

    Ge0rG and Link Mauve?

  237. Guus


  238. Zash has left

  239. dwd

    Guus, You have to say MattJ three times in front of a mirror, I think.

  240. Guus

    My name has a similar, but different effect: the mirror breaks.

  241. vanitasvitae has joined

  242. ralphm

    Mirror, mirror, who's the luast of all?

  243. dwd is on minutes, by the way.

  244. Guus


  245. Seve

    dwd, thank you very much

  246. ralphm

    1. Appointment of officers

  247. ralphm

    Alex has agreed to serve for another year as Secretary. I motion we reconfirm Alex Gnauck as our Secretary.

  248. Ge0rG is there for purposes of the Compliance Suite

  249. Guus


  250. Guus

    (you're here for many purposes, Ge0rG )

  251. Seve


  252. nyco


  253. ralphm


  254. ralphm

    Peter has agreed to serve for another year as Treasurer. I motion we reconfirm Peter Saint-André as our Treasurer.

  255. Guus


  256. vanitasvitae has left

  257. vanitasvitae has joined

  258. Seve


  259. ralphm


  260. ralphm

    Since we already have 3 votes, I'll say Yay again.

  261. Guus

    Thank you, Alex and Peter, for putting in the effort once again. Appreciated!

  262. ralphm

    Missing votes to follow

  263. ralphm

    On our Executive Director, Peter mentioned he didn't have time last week, but could this week. I haven't picked up on that, yet.

  264. nyco


  265. ralphm

    (thanks nyco)

  266. Guus

    (do we need the missing votes to confirm them? We have quorum, don't we?)

  267. nyco


  268. ralphm

    Guus: we don't but I think it is nice if we have votes from all Directors.

  269. Seve

    I agree

  270. ralphm

    And chiming in with Guus thanking Peter and Alex.

  271. Seve as well

  272. ralphm

    2. Compliance Suites

  273. MattJ


  274. nyco


  275. MattJ

    Sorry, here now

  276. Guus

    (wow, sloooow mirror!)

  277. ralphm

    Hi MattJ, feel free to put in your votes.

  278. ralphm

    Meanwhile, dwd: go!

  279. MattJ

    +1 to Alex for Secretary, +1 to Peter for Teasurer

  280. ralphm


  281. dwd

    Oh, sorry - Ge0rG would be best to lead here.

  282. nyco

    I'll have to leave at 16:00

  283. Ge0rG

    We had a discussion in Council regarding what form Compliance Suites should take, but I'm not even sure what we wanted to escalate to Board

  284. nyco


  285. dwd

    TThe thing to escalate was in terms of using them as a marketing tool, perhaps filtering the software the XSF lists, etc.

  286. nyco

    "XMPP 2019"?

  287. Ge0rG

    Ah, so compliant software. Yeah.

  288. Guus

    I don't think council needs board to approve naming?

  289. nyco

    please define "marketing tool"

  290. Guus

    I don't think council needs board to approve naming (of XEPs)?

  291. nyco

    agree with that, naming can be left to the Council

  292. Ge0rG

    We had a discussion about badges some years ago. So that compliant software can be marked as such with nifty labels

  293. ralphm

    Guus: some, most are Council's business

  294. Ge0rG

    I think the current technical form of CS is appropriate, if we can have a prominent link on the top of the XEP list

  295. dwd

    nyco, Well, that's it, isn't it? The Council merely noted that we don'tt do much as an organisation with the compliance suites - what marketing could we do with them?

  296. nyco

    badges can be cool, very visual, understandable in one eye shot, impactful I like that idea

  297. ralphm

    Badges comes up every time Compliance Suites are discussed

  298. jonas’ wants to enqueue himself for the Any Other Business section of the board meeting

  299. ralphm

    The problem is that someone needs to check, right?

  300. Ge0rG

    nyco: that opens the question of whether badges will be issued by XSF after some formal/automatic verification, or if everybody can just assign them on their own

  301. Ge0rG

    and what kind of abuse management mechanism we have then

  302. MattJ

    This same conversation :)

  303. MattJ

    There is no way we can verify who complies and who doesn't, so either the badges are free for everyone or we shouldn't have them

  304. jonas’

    just like with trademarks, spot an infringement and sue them?

  305. nyco

    yep, qualification, certification, etc.

  306. jonas’

    (of course, we can’t do that because manpower)

  307. MattJ

    I'd be totally fine with prominent links to the compliance suites, and treating them purely as guidance for developers

  308. ralphm

    I don't feel like being in the business of certifying

  309. Ge0rG

    "business" is a rather correct analogy, I fear

  310. dwd

    Sure, but we can also let people self-certify and pull this from them if they are clearly taking the piss.

  311. Ge0rG

    So what can we do, short of a certification business, to promote XMPP 2019?

  312. nyco

    I like this: https://www.coreinfrastructure.org/programs/badge-program/

  313. ralphm

    If someone claims their software complies with the suite, and they don't, well, let the intarntubes' scorn be on them.

  314. nyco

    it's declarative, but promote good/best practices

  315. MattJ

    dwd, "clearly" is still subjective, unfortunately

  316. Guus

    I think we, as the XSF should pace ourselves a bit here.

  317. nyco

    "intarntubes" 😉

  318. dwd

    Perhaps. But given that if people don't even claim a free thing, then that's a valuable signal in itself...

  319. lnj has joined

  320. Guus

    I'd not object to run some sort of compliance checker in our domain, akin to what we do with xmpp.net (of which the state is itself somehwat unclear)

  321. Ge0rG

    xmpp.net is broken, not unclear ;)

  322. jonas’

    although at the moment the only thing broken is the DNSSEC verification

  323. jonas’

    which means that SRV records are not honoured for 99% of services

  324. ralphm

    And also not an XSF effort

  325. Guus

    Ge0rG part of the reason why it remains broken is that we don't know who's responsible, I thik.

  326. jonas’

    MattJ did a lot of good work on it.

  327. blabla has joined

  328. Ge0rG

    Guus: I think it's because the intersection of people who have the knowledge, the time and the power to fix is is empty.

  329. MattJ

    I have some time, I've put some work into it, fixed some stuff, but it still needs a little bit more - I'll get to it soon (but probably not before next week)

  330. Kev

    Isn't it mostly that it's abandoned upstream?

  331. nyco

    so the intersection of people who have the knowledge, the time and the power to do badges is empty as well?

  332. ralphm

    I'd be ok with someone designing an official badge, and letting people use that when they feel like they should show it.

  333. MattJ

    Kev, I've forked the repo and am fixing stuff, so happy to be the new upstream

  334. ralphm

    I'd have to be convinced to have compliance testing itself be an XSF activity

  335. MattJ

    ralphm, +1

  336. nyco

    let's ask lead devs: if they were badges, would you use them?

  337. MattJ

    Yes, probably

  338. Kev

    I doubt it.

  339. Ge0rG

    ralphm: it would probably make sense to have badges according to the compliance suite blocks, i.e. "core|advanced" "web|im|mobile" "client|server"

  340. Guus

    Ralph, I think that making the tools to do the checking available, could be an XSF activity

  341. ralphm

    Ge0rG: sure

  342. Ge0rG

    ralphm: it would probably make sense to have badges according to the compliance suite blocks, i.e. "core|advanced" "web|im|mobile" "client|server" *2019*

  343. dwd

    My advice to the Board would be: Make the badges, and if they're useless, drop them.

  344. MattJ

    Guus, no, the checking is next to impossible I'm afraid

  345. Guus

    But I'm not in favor of us doing the checking / publishing it, etc, other than to the extend what xmpp.net does for anyone that uses the tool.

  346. Ge0rG

    I'd use badges, except my client doesn't qualify because I don't consider Avatars a must-have.

  347. ralphm

    Guus: I think that building such tools is ambitious project

  348. ralphm


  349. MattJ

    I stick to "impossible" :)

  350. Ge0rG

    large parts of CS can't be usefully tested automatically.

  351. Guus

    ralphm , I"m not saying 'build it'

  352. Guus

    I'm suggesting: host one, if someone builds it.

  353. ralphm

    MattJ: I'm a positive guy :-D

  354. Ge0rG

    But it would be awesome to have a client/server test suite that I could run my code against.

  355. nyco

    we can "test"/"validate" appetite for badges, with only a small prototype

  356. MattJ

    compliance.conversations.im is a good example. It's a great tool, but anyone could easily pass 100% by cheating

  357. ralphm

    Guus: oh, I mistook 'making' for 'building', then.

  358. dwd

    nyco, Right. You don't even need a checker. Maybe people won't take the piss.

  359. genofire has left

  360. ralphm

    Let's do this, as dwd also mentioned, ask if someone would like to design such badges.

  361. MattJ


  362. Ge0rG

    I'd say developers should be allowed to use the badge on their own, with a way for users to complain and the XSF to revoke badges.

  363. Seve

    I'm not sure about this. Badges should be something you can trust. And nobody is going to endorse those, from what I understand.

  364. Guus

    but, to address dwd's suggestion: I don't see anything wrong with linking a set of badges to the compliance suite xeps

  365. nyco

    maybe we should not start with the design, which is costly

  366. ralphm

    Then, if we have such a person, they can work with Council regarding what they should include.

  367. MattJ

    nyco, it may be possible to find someone willing to donate time

  368. ralphm

    nyco: we've already have had the Suites themselves. I don't see people putting the text around their clients, so a badge is then what we can do. If we don't start with design, what then?

  369. nyco

    for example, instead instead of an automated testing system, we can start with a crowdsourced testing system

  370. Ge0rG

    yeah, we shouldn't start out with tasking a commercial designer, rather ask for volunteers

  371. ralphm

    nyco: while I am not against that idea, I don't think it should be an XSF activity.

  372. ralphm

    And I didn't mention paying for a design.

  373. nyco


  374. nyco

    "costly" does not forcefully mean "money", can mean time, effort, delay...

  375. lorddavidiii has left

  376. dwd is now in another meeting, and will catch up with Minutes later...

  377. MattJ

    If we don't have anyone in the community, there are people I'd be happy to reach out to

  378. ralphm

    So far I've seen two +1 (me and MattJ) and one +0 (Guus).

  379. ralphm

    What do we do?

  380. Guus

    for what: create a batch?

  381. Ge0rG

    I think the Board should decide whether such implementation badges should be hosted on xmpp.org or if they can be hosted by the respective implementations.

  382. ralphm

    Ge0rG: I'd be ok with hosting it themselves, and adding to our lists when they do

  383. Ge0rG

    And then whether Badges are assigned explicitly by the XSF, or whether implementations can claim a badge and we have a way to retract that.

  384. Guus

    ralphm, "adding to our lists" <-- what do you mean, exactly, with that?

  385. ralphm

    Ge0rG: I am not in favor of assigning them explicitly

  386. MattJ

    I'd like them to still be within the control of the XSF, and enforce some basic constraints on their use... like linking them to a specific place

  387. ralphm

    Guus: https://xmpp.org/software/

  388. Ge0rG

    Something like: "Developers are allowed to display the respective badge if they are in good belief that their implementation complies with the respective part of CS. This can be disputed by users, upon which the XSF may retract this right from a developer"

  389. nyco

    if Compliances Suites are a responsibility/duty of the XSF, I see badges as the same

  390. ralphm

    MattJ: like we had with Jabber Powered?

  391. MattJ


  392. Ge0rG

    The list that contains Pidgin as an endorsed XMPP client.

  393. MattJ


  394. Guus

    I'm not in favor of adding badges to our lists of software. I am +1 of having badges created that can be used freely by others.

  395. ralphm

    I like that

  396. Ge0rG

    Guus: "freely" is too free for me, personally.

  397. Guus

    Ge0rG we won't be able to enforce anything anyway

  398. nyco

    I'm gone, sorry

  399. Guus

    Thanks nyco

  400. ralphm

    Guus: my idea was that a project wants to, when they register their software, we could include a way to say if they want to carry the badge in their entry. It wouldn't be an endorsement.

  401. Ge0rG

    Guus: we will be if badges are only shown on the XSF pages ;)

  402. lorddavidiii has joined

  403. Guus

    badges can very easily be copied.

  404. Ge0rG

    Using a trademark on the badges will allow control over how they may be used.

  405. ralphm

    Guus: we would if the XSF retains the rights on the badge and have a policy.

  406. Ge0rG

    We don't need hundreds of pages of legalese for that.

  407. Ge0rG

    But e.g. the Bluetooth logo is managed in that way.

  408. Guus

    ralphm I'm pretty sure that people we don't want to use the badge, won't care about our policy.

  409. Guus

    They'd simply use it in their software / download page, whatever.

  410. Kev

    I think the XSF being in a position to revoke would be a painful thing for us.

  411. nyco has left

  412. Kev

    We /know/ that people tend to ... exaggerate compliance with things.

  413. Ge0rG

    Kev: what's your alternative suggestion?

  414. ralphm

    Guus: let scorn be on them

  415. Ge0rG

    Guus: having the legal right to enforce doesn't mean making use of that right.

  416. jonas’

    don’t you lose trademark rights if you don’t enforce them?

  417. Guus

    ralphm exactly - which is why I'm fine with _having badges_ to be used by others. I'm against us assigning specific badges to specific projects though (on our site)

  418. Kev

    It does unless you want it to be useless.

  419. Seve

    I don't see the point of the badges if we cannot make people trust the badges.

  420. Kev

    If you want badges (and I'm not convinced they're adding any value at all, but whatever), I think the best you can hope for is the same as claiming compliance at the moment. It's a claim.

  421. Ge0rG

    I see the point, but there are really only three options here: 1. explicitly white-list badge-bearers (can be still worked around) 2. have a policy for self-assessment and retraction 3. allow everyone to claim everything and ignore violations

  422. Seve

    Unless the badges are just for guidance and we don't endorse it officially

  423. ralphm


  424. Kev

    But it's not clear to me what problem the badges are solving, either.

  425. rion has left

  426. Guus

    if someone wants to fly a banner, claiming compliancy with a certain XEP, I'd be OK for us to provide a uniform design to that. I want to prevent us from listing things as 'compliant' though.

  427. ralphm

    I suggest everybody here has a look at that, think about whether we want something like it for badges and continue this discussion next week.

  428. ralphm

    Guus: I can see that

  429. Kev

    Guus: Which is exactly the state at the moment with saying you support CS2018, I think.

  430. Guus

    before we hammer off - @jonas' had an AOB.

  431. Guus

    Kev, exactly, but with a fancy colorful badge.

  432. Guus

    (which might add a uniform way of recognizing things, at best)

  433. jonas’

    is this intended to have Approving Body Council? https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0381.html

  434. jonas’

    it doesn’t make sense to me, but maybe that’s just me

  435. ralphm

    3. AOB

  436. Ge0rG

    > and will not alter the official Logo in any way, including its size 🤔

  437. ralphm

    Ge0rG: we can modify all the terms, it just something we did before, and might be a good start for the rest of the discussion

  438. Guus

    @jonas' at first glance, I think you're right. Council does not approve SIGs.

  439. Guus

    jonas' at first glance, I think you're right. Council does not approve SIGs.

  440. ralphm

    jonas’: agreed, Board should be the approving body

  441. jonas’

    suggestion: I change the approving body to board and re-issue the LC

  442. ralphm

    Given this has been in the queue for two years, I'm not sure if it still makes sense

  443. Ge0rG

    ralphm: I really like it

  444. ralphm

    jonas’: ok

  445. jonas’

    the LC might be a good way to figure it out -- and to move it to rejected if not needed.

  446. ralphm


  447. Guus

    jonas’ : agreed.

  448. ralphm

    And whether its authors still want it

  449. ralphm

    Anything else?

  450. ralphm

    4. Date of Next

  451. !xsf_martin has joined

  452. ralphm


  453. ralphm

    5. Close

  454. ralphm

    Thanks all!

  455. Guus

    do we need a formal third +1 for Jonas' question?

  456. ralphm bangs gavel

  457. Alex has joined

  458. ralphm

    Guus: I don't think so. Clearly a typo

  459. jjrh has left

  460. Seve

    Thank you very much everybody :)

  461. ralphm

    And we just missed it on our radar. Also nobody asked about it.

  462. ralphm set the topic to

    XSF Discussion | Logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/ | Agenda https://trello.com/b/Dn6IQOu0/board-meetings

  463. Guus

    I don't think it works that way, even if it's a typo, but, fine. 🙂

  464. ralphm

    Guus: well, Council cannot approve SIGs

  465. ralphm


  466. Guus

    that's true

  467. ralphm

    So the logical conclusion is that we are the approving body

  468. ralphm

    It just popped up on the radar because Council has been listing all the open LCs

  469. jonas’

    s/Council/Editor/, but yeah

  470. ralphm

    I stand corrected

  471. jonas’

    need to re-issue them for this term

  472. ralphm


  473. Kev has left

  474. Guus

    MattJ : thanks for taking over the upstream stuff for xmpp.net - would you mind putting it all in one place?

  475. Guus

    meaning: clone everything, even if you didn't modify it yet, in one account under either github or bitbucket (or whatever)?

  476. Kev has left

  477. Guus

    It's somewhat confusing (to me) to figure out what part of the software lives where, and who's maintaining it. I'd love to have one account where this all is listed.

  478. Kev has left

  479. Guus

    I'd not be against creating an xmpp.net github repo, just for this, outside of XSF control.

  480. Guus

    (my board hat was off, there)

  481. jjrh has left

  482. Guus

    Also, feel free to add me to any such org.

  483. Ge0rG

    I've heard there is an org called JabberSPAM now.

  484. Ge0rG

    Oh, I think that org would actually need an XSF seal of approval.

  485. jjrh has left

  486. jonas’


  487. jonas’

    certainly for TM use

  488. Guus

    We'll get you the T-Shirt, Ge0rG

  489. Guus

    when its approved, obviously.

  490. ralphm

    Ge0rG: can you send an email to Board about this?

  491. jonas’


  492. ralphm

    Because indeed, that might be a TM issue

  493. ralphm

    jonas’: that, too, yes

  494. jonas’

    trademark@jabber.org is the official address for TM issues AFAIK

  495. jjrh has left

  496. ralphm

    jonas’: I also wanted Board, because Peter isn't our ED anymore, and I'm unsure who's handling this now

  497. jonas’

    I see

  498. Ge0rG

    We need to fix https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/jabber-trademark/license-decision-process.html then

  499. ralphm

    I'll include this in the chat with Peter

  500. Ge0rG

    ralphm: AFAIR, board@ is moderators-only

  501. ralphm

    Good point

  502. Ge0rG

    eh, members-only

  503. Ge0rG

    So there is no way to contact Board.

  504. Ge0rG

    ralphm: also mention his comment on https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/200

  505. ralphm

    Just send it to that address and me. There's also info@xmpp.org, but that's probably also Peter, so we need to figure that out.

  506. ralphm

    Since he's still an officer of the corporation, I'm sure it is fine

  507. dwd has left

  508. oli has joined

  509. oli has joined

  510. Ge0rG

    ralphm: sent to info@ and to you

  511. igoose has left

  512. igoose has joined

  513. lnj

    Is here someone who could create me an account on the wiki?

  514. Ge0rG

    lnj: yeah

  515. lnj

    Ge0rG, Could you create one for me or how does that work?

  516. Ge0rG

    lnj: I need your email address and the desired CamelCase username.

  517. Ge0rG

    lnj: via PM is alright

  518. lnj

    ... wait a sec .. need to start gajim for pms

  519. Ge0rG

    lnj: xmpp:georg@yax.im if that's better

  520. Guus

    assuming that your email address is the first thing that you'll post on the public wiki, maybe a PM isn't that important?

  521. vanitasvitae has left

  522. blabla has joined

  523. Guus has left

  524. APach has joined

  525. dwd has left

  526. !xsf_martin has left

  527. oli has joined

  528. vanitasvitae has left

  529. Alex has left

  530. !xsf_martin has joined

  531. vanitasvitae has left

  532. lnj has left

  533. efrit has left

  534. nyco has left

  535. marc has left

  536. igoose has left

  537. igoose has joined

  538. marc has joined

  539. Alex has joined

  540. Alex has left

  541. UsL has left

  542. UsL has joined

  543. Kev has left

  544. lorddavidiii has left

  545. lorddavidiii has joined

  546. l has left

  547. l has joined

  548. waqas has joined

  549. lovetox has joined

  550. daniel has left

  551. daniel has joined

  552. daniel has left

  553. daniel has joined

  554. !xsf_martin has left

  555. !xsf_martin has joined

  556. Nekit has left

  557. Nekit has joined

  558. daniel has left

  559. daniel has joined

  560. labdsf has left

  561. daniel has left

  562. daniel has joined

  563. rion has left

  564. lskdjf has joined

  565. lskdjf has joined

  566. lskdjf has left

  567. daniel has left

  568. daniel has joined

  569. genofire has left

  570. pep. has left

  571. Yagiza has left

  572. goffi has left

  573. marc has left

  574. marc has joined

  575. Arc has joined

  576. daniel has left

  577. daniel has joined

  578. blabla has joined

  579. blabla has joined

  580. vanitasvitae has left

  581. jjrh has left

  582. APach has left

  583. marc_ has joined

  584. vanitasvitae has left

  585. frainz has left

  586. frainz has joined

  587. 404.city has left

  588. l has joined

  589. vanitasvitae has left

  590. Steve Kille has joined

  591. oli has joined

  592. jonas’

    Kev, nudge nudge https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/718

  593. marc_ has left

  594. labdsf has joined

  595. ThibG has left

  596. ThibG has joined

  597. Marc Laporte has joined

  598. Marc Laporte has left

  599. Steve Kille has left

  600. rion has left

  601. dos has left

  602. vanitasvitae has left

  603. vanitasvitae has left

  604. vanitasvitae has joined

  605. Ge0rG has joined

  606. Alex has left

  607. goffi has joined

  608. jjrh has left

  609. !xsf_martin has left

  610. !xsf_martin has joined

  611. jjrh has left

  612. Kev

    I don't think I was aware of that, let me mail myself.

  613. !xsf_martin has left

  614. !xsf_martin has joined

  615. !xsf_martin has left

  616. !xsf_martin has joined

  617. Neustradamus

    Jabberspam -> Safety Jabber, you can search on ML

  618. Neustradamus

    https://safetyjabber.com/ https://android.safetyjabber.com https://sj.ms/ https://safetyapps.zone/sjim.html http://safetyjabbercom.blogspot.com/ https://sjsoftwaredev.com/sj-im/ ...

  619. Ge0rG

    Neustradamus: I can't even...

  620. vanitasvitae has left

  621. vanitasvitae has joined

  622. blabla has joined

  623. marc has left

  624. marc has joined

  625. lnj has left

  626. ralphm

    Uhm https://safetyjabber.com/trademarks.php

  627. l has joined

  628. genofire has left

  629. genofire has joined

  630. vanitasvitae has left

  631. vanitasvitae has joined

  632. genofire

    Neustradamus: Skype usw PGP ? 🤣

  633. vanitasvitae has left

  634. ThibG has joined

  635. vanitasvitae has joined

  636. ta has left

  637. ta has left

  638. labdsf has left

  639. labdsf has joined

  640. blabla has joined

  641. nyco has left

  642. MattJ has left

  643. vanitasvitae has left

  644. labdsf has left

  645. labdsf has joined

  646. igoose has left

  647. igoose has joined

  648. marc_ has joined

  649. !xsf_martin has left

  650. Ge0rG

    ralphm: it's an interesting question whether you can enforce trademark on a substring.

  651. lnj has left

  652. Wiktor has joined

  653. tux has left

  654. tux has joined

  655. Zash has left

  656. lnj has left

  657. lskdjf has joined

  658. tux has left

  659. tux has joined

  660. ralphm

    I'm sure that Cisco has ways

  661. dos has left

  662. moparisthebest

    Ge0rG, write a new RDBMS named SafetyOracleDatabase and let us know how it goes :)

  663. lumi has left

  664. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  665. vanitasvitae has left

  666. lovetox has left

  667. moparisthebest has joined

  668. thorsten has left

  669. thorsten has joined

  670. ta has joined

  671. goffi has joined

  672. MattJ has joined

  673. marc_ has left

  674. pep. has joined

  675. ta has left

  676. ta has left

  677. goffi has joined

  678. marc has left

  679. marc has joined

  680. marc has left

  681. marc has joined

  682. Seve has left

  683. lorddavidiii has left

  684. mightyBroccoli has left

  685. rion has left

  686. mightyBroccoli has joined

  687. Zash has left

  688. Zash has left

  689. Zash has left

  690. mightyBroccoli has left

  691. mightyBroccoli has joined

  692. Zash has joined

  693. goffi has joined

  694. valo has left

  695. valo has joined

  696. goffi has joined

  697. jjrh has left

  698. thorsten has left

  699. thorsten has joined

  700. dos has left

  701. goffi has joined

  702. goffi has joined

  703. goffi has joined

  704. Zash has left

  705. jjrh has left

  706. goffi has left

  707. dos has left