XSF Discussion - 2019-01-10


  1. MattJ

    pep.: you're not an issue :)

  2. MattJ

    It was more a general observation that we need to control access somewhere

  3. jonas’

    Guus et al., going to fix my council bio in the afternoon

  4. jonas’

    not sure what to put in it, never worked with XMPP professionally :)

  5. jonas’

    (unless you count the failed experiment to save XMPP from being ditched in the company I worked for at that time)

  6. Guus

    I thoroughly disagree that we're controlling access in any meaningful way.

  7. Guus

    we're making it hard for people to be effective, yes.

  8. jonas’

    for the xmpp.net thing, I think we are

  9. jonas’

    or at least, we can be, if iteam reviews the diff before using a new image ;-)

  10. Guus

    but there's hardly an access policy being enforced.

  11. Guus

    @jonas', in your bio, quote your role as editor, and one or two contributions you made over the year. That'll quickly get you to a couple of lines of text.

  12. jonas’

    is your client doing the '@' thing or are you?

  13. Guus

    I am, in an attempt to make my client do mentions. It triggers autocomplete, but I think a bit of parsing fails properly recognizing the ' being part of your name

  14. Guus

    so, it it can't do mention, it'll send the @ symbol

  15. Guus

    jonas’ <-tab completed

  16. Guus

    @jonas' <- typed manually

  17. Guus

    right,there's a difference there.

  18. jonas’

    the tab completed one does work as a highlight in my client, the other one doesn’t :)

  19. jonas’

    fun bugs to discover :)

  20. Guus

    Yeah, the mention is in context of xep-0372

  21. Guus

    I found another bug where it's case sensitive too

  22. Guus

    and, as the failed mention neglects to remove the @ symbol, some clients fail to properly recognize the name, resulting in no kind of notification being triggered at all

  23. Guus

    quite the opposite of what was intended

  24. Guus

    took a while to figure out why this was happening 🙂

  25. Guus

    https://github.com/conversejs/converse.js/issues/1401

  26. jonas’

    Guus, the reason why it doesn’t tabcomplete is that ' (what you are typing) and ’ (what I am using) are different characters :)

  27. Guus

    ah. My font renders them the same

  28. jonas’

    it’s a trap :)

  29. goffi

    dwd: yes all good now (sorry I wasn't paying attention to the chat last evening)

  30. Guus

    updated / closed the ticket

  31. Guus

    Upon (very) close inspection, my font _does_ render them different. I think thre's a one pixel difference

  32. jonas’

    Guus, lol

  33. jonas’

    you could still argue that converse should normalise those by the way, because it’s hard for non-weird people to type those

  34. jonas’

    although the NFKC procedure doesn’t normalize it, so it would have to be a custom lookup table

  35. Guus

    meh. I'm shooting to much issues for that project as it is 🙂

  36. Guus

    could you / someone confirm that this is roughly what we want, summit announcement wise? https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/503

  37. jonas’

    I think there’s a more proper way to link to the page from the markdown

  38. jonas’

    I’ll have to look into it, one sec

  39. jonas’

    yeah, try {filename}pages/community/... instead of /community

  40. jonas’

    that’ll use pelicans linking mechanism which is more robust against use of save_as in the page itself

  41. Ge0rG

    Guus: the content looks good

  42. Guus

    @jonas' I dont' understand

  43. Guus

    hargh

  44. Guus

    jonas’ I don't understand.

  45. jonas’

    substitute: * [XMPP Summit 23, Brussels, Belgium](/community/events/summit23) with * [XMPP Summit 23, Brussels, Belgium]({filename}pages/community/events/summit23)

  46. Guus

    jonas’ will that work in that index.html too?

  47. Guus

    I"m not sure if that's parsed?

  48. jonas’

    I’m not sure about index.html either, so let’s play it safe there

  49. jonas’

    (and I don’t have a xmpp.org checkout at hand to test)

  50. Guus

    change pushed.

  51. Guus

    jonas’ like that?

  52. Guus

    oh, that actually doesn't work

  53. Guus

    my docker instance generates a link to http://localhost:8080/community/%7Bfilename%7Dpages/community/events/summit23

  54. jonas’

    meh

  55. jonas’

    then revert

  56. jonas’

    sorry for the misinformation (maybe it has to do with our pelican version?) but actually that’s supposed to work

  57. Guus

    no problem

  58. Guus

    merged

  59. jonas’

    \o/

  60. Guus

    So, I was annoyed by the manual copy of sidebar menus, and did this to "fix" things: https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/504

  61. Guus

    reviews are very welcome.

  62. dwd

    goffi, Thanks for the pointer.

  63. jonas’

    Guus, request a review from me, will see if I can look into it this afternoon

  64. Guus

    jonas’ done

  65. Zash

    MattJ: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/696#discussion_r213904512 stumbled upon this

  66. Ge0rG

    This is wrong on so many levels, I can't even...

  67. MattJ

    Replied, thanks :)

  68. debacle

    Someone from the Berlin XMPP meetup likes to write on the wiki. It's about the sprint. Who should be contacted to create an account?

  69. Ge0rG

    debacle: I can do that

  70. Ge0rG

    needs a username in wiki CamelCase syntax and an email address for password delivery

  71. debacle

    I pass your JID to him, Ge0rG?

  72. Ge0rG

    debacle: feel free

  73. debacle

    thnx

  74. Neustradamus

    Guus, MattJ, my dearest congratulations for xmppoke/xmppoke-frontend and XMPP.net!

  75. Guus

    Thanks!

  76. nyco

    I'll be 5-10 min late for the meeting

  77. nyco

    sorry

  78. Seve

    Ok

  79. ralphm set the topic to

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

  80. ralphm bangs gavel

  81. ralphm

    0. Welcome + Agenda

  82. MattJ

    Hey

  83. ralphm

    Hi!

  84. Guus

    hello

  85. ralphm

    Who has anything to add to the agenda?

  86. MattJ

    Nothing here

  87. Guus

    Agenda has been filled over the last few weeks, on trello

  88. Ge0rG still has the same topics as last week

  89. Guus

    (I'm hoping you guys try to keep track of that during the week, in order to prepare)

  90. Seve has nothing to add

  91. ralphm

    I do, but I still ask anyway.

  92. ralphm

    1. Minute taker

  93. Guus

    👍

  94. ralphm

    who?

  95. ralphm

    ...

  96. ralphm

    2. Commitments

  97. ralphm

    Sending out an e-mail to finally schedule a meeting with Peter today.

  98. ralphm

    3. GSoC

  99. nyco

    here

  100. ralphm

    Guus, I suppose no admins have signed up?

  101. Guus

    Actually, one has

  102. Guus

    Florian / flow volunteers.

  103. nyco

    oh, cool

  104. Guus

    To quote him:

  105. Guus

    > I would be happy to help the XSF and the XMPP community with GSoC, including acting as an organization admin. > I've been a mentor three times, visited different GSoC events (mentor summit, local meetings) and know various other GSoC mentors and admins from other organizations.

  106. ralphm

    That's great!

  107. Guus

    hargh, doorbell, one sec

  108. Guus

    and back

  109. Seve

    Sounds awesome, flow thanks

  110. Guus

    I suggest that we let flow take the reigns on this, and see if he can organize an XSF umbrella for GSoC involvement of projects that are interested.

  111. ralphm

    I think that Kev was our last admin, so I hope he can answer any questions Flow might have.

  112. Kev

    Hmm?

  113. Kev

    Oh, GSoC.

  114. ralphm

    yes

  115. Guus

    I motion that we bestow upon Florian the role of XSF GSoC'19 admin, and that we ask him in that capacity to organize an XSF umbrella for projects that which to participate.

  116. Kev

    We must have co-admins BTW.

  117. nyco

    +1 and +1

  118. MattJ

    +1

  119. Kev

    So Flow on his own isn't enough here.

  120. ralphm

    Kev: to review applications, you mean?

  121. Kev

    (At least in name, even if they don't do anything, there must be other people willing to do stuff if Flow doesn't)

  122. Kev

    No, I mean Google require there not to be only a single admin.

  123. ralphm

    How did we do this before?

  124. Kev

    I found people who trusted me enough as admin to put their name down in the expectation they didn't have to do anything, generally.

  125. Guus

    Arranging for a correct registration with Google shall be up to him, then.

  126. Guus

    We wanted someone to lead the effort - I feel that we now have one. He can take it from here.

  127. Seve

    Feels like a solid start +1

  128. ralphm

    +1. As it is a requirement to complete the application, I am curious to see who Flow will draft.

  129. Guus

    I'll let him know that we accepted his offer to act as admin

  130. ralphm

    3. FOSDEM / Summit

  131. Guus

    registrations are pouring in.

  132. ralphm

    The FOSDEM organisation has a sent a provisional overview of the stand assignments. I am a bit worried about it, as it shows 5 tables in the same area as before, but just one for us..

  133. Kev

    (For GSoC - I'd like to note that before the application we need to have our ideas page in order, etc., so we should make another call as we approach that date as to whether to actually apply, based on the quality of what we've got. We shouldn't burn the goodwill we've built up over the years with the GSoC team)

  134. ralphm

    So I am going to try and see what we can do about this.

  135. Guus

    ralphm that'd be good, thanks

  136. ralphm

    Kev: noted and agreed.

  137. Guus

    I'm waiting for a sign-up form from the hotel (they appear to be having difficulties generating one, but did already receive my signature on their offer.

  138. ralphm

    There's no alternative than wait?

  139. Guus

    I am almost in contact with the regular restaurant for the XSF Dinner (we keep missing eachother), and we have had a sponsor for said dinner step forward.

  140. Guus

    I pinged them, they told me to wait longer.

  141. ralphm

    Ok thanks.

  142. ralphm

    Also yay for the dinner sponsor.

  143. Guus

    one thing that concerns me is a lack of salesware

  144. Guus

    if we do want to sell stuff, we should design/order things

  145. ralphm

    Yeah, I was thinking about this too. We have no swag left, in terms of clothing.

  146. ralphm

    Last year, there was a suggestion for a Summit-only t-shirt. I actually made a 'design' for it.

  147. nyco

    we're 10th Jan, it's late...

  148. nyco

    I mean to generate clothing

  149. ralphm

    I disagree

  150. Guus

    lets take this to the SCAM muc after the meeting

  151. ralphm

    yeah

  152. ralphm

    4. Pseudonanymous Membership Applications

  153. MattJ

    The annual discussion? :)

  154. ralphm

    I see there's a question on whether members can be anonymous or semi-anonymous. I think this was addressed in earlier years and the answer has always been no.

  155. Guus

    Is that an anuual thing? Never heard it before.

  156. Ge0rG

    Me neither.

  157. ralphm

    How did this come up

  158. Kev

    People have too much time.

  159. Ge0rG

    ralphm: I was asked whether it's possible.

  160. Guus

    SOmeone asked Ge0rG , who asked us.

  161. Ge0rG

    All I found was the XEP that's next on the agenda

  162. Guus

    I am happy with not allowing it.

  163. nyco

    +0

  164. MattJ

    Yes, it's been discussed extensively in the past, and there are reasons it's not feasible or sensible (as nice as it may be in theory)

  165. ralphm

    There's no vote on this. I think it comes from our being a registered corporation for the state of Delaware.

  166. Guus

    There appears to be precedent to not allow it. On top of that, there might be legal issues related to accepting anonymous members into an organization where they can hold legal status.

  167. Guus

    well, ok then: no.

  168. MattJ

    Guus, exactly

  169. Ge0rG

    I'm happy with whatever the official answer is, and even more happy if it gets documented.

  170. Guus

    Ge0rG did just volunteer to do our minutes, I think. 🙂

  171. MattJ

    Heh

  172. Seve

    Ge0rG, thank you

  173. Guus

    AS Ge0rG suggested, https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0345.html might be a good way to formalize this further.

  174. Ge0rG

    You don't want me to write minutes in my current mood, sorry.

  175. Ge0rG

    I'd be much more grumpy than usual. Also I'm affected by today's decisions.

  176. Guus

    it has been deferred, but has received earlier updates based on feedback. It has some editorial issues (spelling/punctuation) but looks good otherwise.

  177. ralphm

    I'm not opposed to resurrecting that XEP.

  178. MattJ

    I'm not opposed either, though I still have some issues with it

  179. ralphm

    Is the other item on typos referring to this XEP specifically?

  180. Ge0rG

    The XEP contains a clear statement that members must apply with their legal name.

  181. Guus

    ralphm I dont think so

  182. MattJ

    I think the typo thing is a general issue

  183. ralphm

    ok

  184. ralphm

    Shall we ask the Editor to LC this XEP?

  185. ralphm

    Then we can collect feedback and resolve issues we have with it ourselves.

  186. Ge0rG

    I *assume* that the typo thing is about whether a Deferred XEP should be re-promoted to Experimental when somebody fixes typos in it.

  187. MattJ

    I found a XEP of mine that should be deferred but only isn't because someone fixed something editorial

  188. Guus

    deferred -> last call is a state transiation that's allowable

  189. Guus

    deferred -> last call is a state transiation that's allowable?

  190. ralphm

    MattJ if you *want* a XEP to be 'deferred' maybe you should retract it.

  191. MattJ

    I don't, I'm glad it's not deferred :)

  192. MattJ

    But it still feels wrong

  193. Ge0rG

    there is another processual thing coming up, regarding https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/727 - we can't move from "Deferred" to "Deprecated" currently, and that might be useful.

  194. Guus

    ok, to many topics at the same time now, I think 🙂 I'm starting to loose track.

  195. dwd

    (Although I did ask that to be run past the community, since Council isn't in consensus about that)

  196. Ge0rG

    What dwd said

  197. ralphm

    On XEP-0345.

  198. ralphm

    We can ask the Editor to undefer it.

  199. ralphm

    Then put it to LC. I'm not sure if that requires any changes to the document.

  200. Guus

    I'd be happy with that

  201. Kev

    XEP 1 talks about updated versions of XEPs, and I don't think a typo can be considered an updated XEP in any substantive way, it's an editorial change. Until recently we wouldn't even have updated the patch number.

  202. ralphm

    Yes, but for XEP-0345 specifically, XEP-0001 says the Editor can decide to change back to Deferred at will.

  203. Seve agrees with Kev

  204. ralphm

    (This agenda item is *only* about members applications, really)

  205. Ge0rG

    you could vote on asking the Editor for doing whatever is needed to LC 345

  206. jonas’

    i put details on the typo thing in the card description

  207. ralphm

    So, besides Guus, who else agrees we will ask the Editor to put XEP-0345 to LC?

  208. MattJ

    I agree

  209. ralphm

    nyco, Seve?

  210. jonas’

    regarding deferred -> lc, I think theres something in the prose of '0001

  211. Guus

    (thanks ralphm )

  212. ralphm

    jonas’: I read it, not directly, but I think it can be done as described above.

  213. Guus

    jonas’ We'd like to revive the XEP, with eventually it going to LC.

  214. jonas’

    sorry I'm on mobile

  215. Seve

    I agree, ralphm

  216. Ge0rG

    > Note that if a XEP is Deferred, the XMPP Extensions Editor may at some point re-assign it to Experimental status

  217. Guus

    if deferred -> LC is not a valid transition, then we can go through one that is valid first.

  218. nyco

    +1

  219. ralphm

    Let the records show that the Board would like the Editor to move XEP-0345 back to Experimental, and then, in a separate step, put it to Proposed.

  220. ralphm

    5. E-mail issue

  221. ralphm

    I understand the Seve has now received Board e-mails.

  222. Guus

    emails from wiki work again, seve receives emails too now.

  223. ralphm

    yay!

  224. Guus

    seems resolved as far as I can tell

  225. Seve

    Yes, very happy :)

  226. Guus

    iteam let me know that action was taken to remove us from a blacklist

  227. ralphm

    6. GitHub Issue 497

  228. ralphm

    https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/issues/497

  229. jonas’

    does an LC for '345 go to standards@ and/or members@ or what? it's procedural and affects membership

  230. Guus

    I put that up, before the comments on that issue poured in

  231. Guus

    jonas’ when in doubt, spam everyone.

  232. jonas’

    Guus: I understand

  233. ralphm

    jonas’: to members

  234. jonas’

    ugh I lag a lot I think

  235. Guus

    As for 497: I think Peter implicitly acknowledged that such an agreement was once made. Therefor, I feel we should honor it and restore the thingy on the website.

  236. ralphm

    This is about the xmpp.org domain having been donated, and requiring a notice to that end on our website.

  237. ralphm

    We should clean up our list of sponsors, and just put a logo for OpenDomain in that sponsor cloud

  238. Guus

    we'll work with them on the 'how'

  239. Guus

    my primary concern for putting this on our board was to see if it was legit.

  240. Guus

    that since has been established.

  241. ralphm

    Yes

  242. ralphm

    ok

  243. ralphm

    7. Clarify typos in Deferred XEPs

  244. Guus

    jonas’ wrote: > I (Editor) ask that we clarify XEP-0001 in such a way that editorial changes to Deferred XEPs do not automatically un-defer them, while non-editorial changes do.

  245. Guus

    that seems sensible to me.

  246. Kev

    I think it's already that, pretty much.

  247. ralphm

    I don't think that fixing a typo is considered a change if it doesn't change anything substantial.

  248. ralphm

    I'm happy for the Editor to make that call.

  249. Kev

    XEP1 talks about x.y versions as being updates, and we publish editorial under x.y.z.

  250. Guus

    we might go one step further and state that editorial changed do not change the state of a XEP at all.

  251. Guus

    we might go one step further and state that editorial changes do not change the state of a XEP at all.

  252. Kev

    Tightening up the wording here seems fine, but I don't think this is a change from what XEP1 is telling us to do.

  253. Seve

    +1 Guus

  254. Guus

    even better

  255. MattJ

    Yep

  256. ralphm

    So we don't have to do anything?

  257. Guus

    just confirm to our editor that he's right.

  258. Guus

    well, he asks us to clarify the text

  259. Guus

    we'll ask him to draft a proposal for that clarification then 🙂

  260. ralphm

    Ok

  261. ralphm

    8. AOB?

  262. nyco

    nope

  263. ralphm

    (some of the other items are pending as per agenda item 2 above)

  264. Guus

    i don't have an AOB.

  265. MattJ

    Nothing here (I do have some low priority things but we're already quite over time and I have another meeting in a moment)

  266. Ge0rG

    ralphm: do you have an estimate on how long the resolution of the JabberSPAM trademark request will take?

  267. ralphm

    Ge0rG: not yet

  268. ralphm

    9. Date of Next

  269. Ge0rG

    We are almost a month in :)

  270. ralphm

    +1W

  271. nyco

    +1

  272. Guus

    @Mattj maybe add them to trello for nexzt time?

  273. MattJ

    Yeah

  274. ralphm

    10. Close

  275. ralphm

    Thanks all!

  276. ralphm bangs gavel

  277. nyco

    thx

  278. Guus

    Thank you

  279. ralphm set the topic to

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

  280. Seve

    Thank you guys!!

  281. MattJ

    Thanks all

  282. edhelas

    different topic now, I wanted to know if some of you were interested by some 2FA mechanism for XMPP ? for example by adding an extra step to SASL ?

  283. Ge0rG

    edhelas: IIRC there was a proposal last year about that. And there are also interesting ideas around per-device passwords and tokens and the like

  284. edhelas

    okay

  285. Zash

    edhelas: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0388.html

  286. ralphm set the topic to

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

  287. debacle

    Ge0rG When I asked Daniel about per-device passwords or Web-API-style tokens, he mentioned also client-side certificates. Not the same thing as 2FA, but related issue.

  288. Zash

    Mmmm https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0257.html

  289. Guus

    I seem to recall that dwd worked on this.

  290. Guus

    ah, he's the author of XEP-0388, so yeah.

  291. Guus

    I updated/archived a bunch of Trello cards.

  292. MattJ

    Thanks

  293. Guus

    jonas’ do you need further info on either question you initiated?

  294. jonas’

    Guus, the typo thing seems to be well-addressed to me

  295. jonas’

    The LC thing is mostly clear, but I’m not sure why you’re insisting on having this in two separate actions?

  296. Guus

    you asked for a change in XEP-0001 - can you prepare a concrete proposal?

  297. jonas’

    Do you want two separate emails?

  298. jonas’

    Guus, I can, can you send me an email about that?

  299. Guus

    jonas’ please use the optimal path that's available. I'm unsure of a state transition from 'deferred' to 'last call' is permitted in XEP-0001.

  300. Guus

    we simply want to revive that XEP.

  301. ralphm

    For those no in summit@muc.xmpp.org, yet, but interested in talking about all things FOSDEM / Summit, please go there.

  302. ralphm

    (no->not)

  303. Guus

    jonas’ mail regarding https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0345.html sent (to members - with an invitation for anyone to review)

  304. dwd

    edhelas, Yeah, At Surevine we built a web-based 2FA thing around SASL2, TOTP, etc. The XEPs and one internet-draft came out of it, as well as some code (for Openfire, open source, rough shape).

  305. dwd

    edhelas, Surevine still have a stanza.io implementation, but I don't believe that is or will be open sourced.

  306. pep.

    Half-Shot, hey, do you have any estimates (or resources showing these estimates) on how many matrix servers there are out there federating?

  307. edhelas

    ah I'm interested

  308. edhelas

    dwd what kind of 2FA did you used ? the Google Auth thing ?

  309. dwd

    edhelas, https://kitten.ietf.narkive.com/OsJEMivx/totp-in-sasl-in-xmpp is a breif for the Kittin folks in IETF. But yes, we used TOTP.

  310. Zash

    pep.: lol

  311. pep.

    oops

  312. dwd

    edhelas, Also: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-August/033148.html

  313. edhelas

    > draft-cridland-kitten-clientkey :D

  314. Zash

    KITTEN

  315. dwd

    edhelas, The IETF used to have a working group called CAT, for Common Authentication Technologies. When it was restarted later, it was obviously called KITTEN, as "Son of CAT".

  316. edhelas

    someday we'll write books about that

  317. Zash

    Return of the Two Cats

  318. dwd

    edhelas, Anyway, it all worked with Google Authenticator and stuff. Handled "remember this browser" stuff and so on, as well as handling session reconnect without re-TOTP (or manual reauth, sometimes).

  319. jonas’

    Guus, I’m not sure whether "such a transition does not exist" is meaningful when the editor can Un-Defer at will

  320. jonas’

    Guus et al.: The normal Last Call template (see for example https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2019-January/035623.html ) does not really fit the XEP-0345 last call.

  321. jonas’

    what do you suggest as "guiding questions"?

  322. Zash

    Does this do what it says it's doing?

  323. Zash

    Does this even make sense?

  324. Zash

    Would you implement this in your wetware?