rion, I am aware of the email you are referring to; I have to think about it.
jonas’
thanks for reminding me
jonas’
rion, this has been requested several times, but I haven’t found a good way to implement it yet. Also, this needs a good way for the components to let the server know that their caps have changed. I have wire format for that in the pipeline, but I’m not really happy with it yet.
jonas’
also, this is mostly server-side stuff then which I’m not at all familiar with
goffihas joined
wurstsalathas joined
waqashas left
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
andyhas joined
Zash
Is there a way for anything to say "my caps changed"?
jonas’
for clients, yes
jonas’
they re-send presence
jonas’
for anything else, not
andyhas left
andyhas joined
Zash
for _anything_
jonas’
Zash, you’re a server dev. what would you prefer? send an IQ to all your open outbound streams? a nonza to all your open outbound streams? have a pubsub node on the server JID itself to which interested peers can subscribe?
jonas’
(the latter is then like the first option, except that you need to keep track about who is interested)
Zash
What's the ultimate goal?
thorstenhas left
thorstenhas joined
edhelas
Zash which metadata ?
lhas joined
jonas’
Zash,
1. provide clients with caps of JIDs related to their server (e.g. a MUC component) during connection startup (e.g. via a stream feature or something)
2. provide servers with means of learning their peers caps and keep them up-to-date (this was requested), and possibly broadcast changes of remote caps to interested local clients
Zash
edhelas: It's a dataform, you can make something up. I'd suggest something with an URI value. Then stick an pubsub URI/L or whatever there.
edhelas
Zash this will require changes on the XMPP server, no ?
Zash
jonas’: for 1) it's probably fine for the server to disco#info external components as they connect and stick a caps-hash in the stream features next to its own (needs some origin indicator)
jonas’
Zash, what do external components do when they change their caps for whatever reason?
Zash
jonas’: atm? nothing.
jonas’
no, what are they supposed to do when that happens?
jonas’
for example, change to an http upload component’s maximum file size
Zash
jonas’: I guess that's what we need to figure out.
jonas’
exactly :)
Zash
So yeah, I guess we want the new caps hash pushed to whoever's interested, probably in some container, most likeley some way to enable it.
Zash
I do wonder if we need to ditch the current component protocol, since it's without stream features
Zash
Does it need to be global or local to the stream?
sezuanhas left
jonas’
"it"?
Zash
jonas’: "caps push" or whatever
jonas’
what does "global" mean then?
404.cityhas joined
jonas’
in the end, it should be able to propagate across domain boundaries I guess
Zash
jonas’: do you(r client) want to be subscribed to eg all the MUCs you ever heard of?
jonas’: "global" as in something that uses stanzas, as opposed to a nonza-thing
jonas’
I was thinking of using <message/> actually because messages with unknown payloads cause the least trouble
Zash
headlines even
jonas’
yeah... for s2s (and component<->server) that might be good enough
jonas’
and when done cleverly it can be implemented with a pubsub component. although that gives me flashbacks of Push
Zash
if it's something clients opt-in to then the payload container shouldn't matter
moparisthebesthas left
moparisthebesthas joined
Zash
maybe some science is in order, like, what disco#info queries do clients send and to what
lnjhas left
Seve
@board I may be on mobile today unfortunately
Wish it worked ^
tuxhas left
andyhas left
labdsfhas joined
Ge0rG
> send an IQ to all your open outbound streams?
What would be wrong with a roster-push style IQ for changed caps?
jonas’
Ge0rG, client2s or s2s or component2s?
Zash
everyone2everyone!!
jonas’
wfm
Ge0rG
jonas’: s2s and component2s
Ge0rG
but yeah, having to disconnect and reconnect in the client is sucky. Also some clients will cache server caps in RAM to not play that dance every single time
jonas’
on connecting, one could send the caps in stream features for s2s, too
Ge0rG
jonas’: this doesn't even start to address the caps-change problem
andyhas joined
Guushas left
jonas’
Ge0rG, that’s true, but I don’t get your comment about reconnect
Ge0rG
jonas’: the solution to update the client-side server-caps hash is to reconnect
Ge0rG
jonas’: except when it's not
rionhas left
jonas’
ah, I see
Ge0rG
I don't think I made it more clear now.
jonas’
enough to nudge my parser out of the local minimum and find a more sensible interpretation of this exchange
Steve Killehas left
Marandahas joined
Steve Killehas joined
lnjhas joined
labdsfhas joined
remkohas joined
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
olihas joined
lnjhas left
Ge0rG
Why is everybody so unimpressed by the 0280 LC?
Zash
Again?
Ge0rG
Zash: yeah. Apparently last year's council never completed the LC
Ge0rG
But as the XEP hasn't changed in years, it still sucks and all my arguments from 2016 still are true.
lnjhas joined
frainzhas left
frainzhas joined
Ge0rG
quick poll: should I make XEP-0410 "Informational" instead of "Standards" before Proposing?
Zash
Is this legal?
jonas’
Ge0rG, I think switching tracks is a rather undefined thing to do
404.cityhas left
Ge0rG
Ohnoez. So now I need to ask Council for a decision on that, which will hand it over to Board for some serious XEP-0001 yak shaving.
Kev
410 is Standards.
Ge0rG
Phew.
Kev
Wait, I thought there was going to me a disco feature in there, did I dream that?
Zash
Kev: Do you have a good explanation of why?
Ge0rG
The only wire protocol it adds is the disco#info tag
jonas’
that’s probably enough
Ge0rG
Phew²
Kev
Zash: Because it introduces a new disco feature.
Kev
Or I thought it did, but it doesn't seem to.
Ge0rG
Kev: https://op-co.de/tmp/xep-0410.html
jonas’
I tend to agree with Kev; it essentially defines a behaviour for IQ ping on MUCs, with feature discovery.
jonas’
that’s not just Informational IMO
Kev
Ge0rG: Ah.
jonas’
Kev, it’s on the TODO, but Ge0rG didn’t want to make changes during LC
Ge0rG
Kev: PR is https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/739 - I'm just preparing it for Council submission
Ge0rG
Kev: and one of the LC notes was "Informational" or "Standards"
Ge0rG
jonas’: now that the LC is formally over, I can ask you any time to merge the PR, right? (I'm not doing it yet, though)
jonas’
I have to read up in '1 on that
jonas’
the LC isn’t formally over until Council has voted, is it?
Ge0rG
jonas’: until Council has voted about what exactly?
jonas’
Advance vs. Reject
Ge0rG
jonas’: and it will vote that on the XEP version submitted for LC? Regardless of two weeks worth of LC feedback?
Ge0rG
Or will it Reject and I need to get you to apply the PR and then to re-LC?
efrithas joined
jonas’
sorry, I don’t have '1 in front of me
Ge0rG
nm.
Ge0rG
I've just sent a mail to standards@, and I'll kindly ask Dave to put the PR+XEP for a vote next week.
rionhas left
olihas joined
rtq3has joined
thorstenhas left
thorstenhas joined
edhelas
so I'd like your point of view on the experiment that I made to add avatar support in Pubsub, basically the idea is to publish 0084 items directly into the Pubsub node as items, this doesn't requires any changes server side, configuring the notifications without payload is adviced
edhelas
the only case it's meh is when a getitems is done on the node, then the base64 of the avatar is delivered
edhelas
on other cases, it's the same system as 0084
jonas’
edhelas, ugly
edhelas
you have a notification headline of the urn:xmpp:avatar:metadata item, you request the content, check the id and request the rest
jonas’
defeats the entire design of '84 with the separate nodes to handle the issue with the large payload
jonas’
will not work properly with node item count limits
jonas’
mixes data and metadata in the same "stream"
edhelas
ok :)
rionhas joined
edhelas
jonas’ what is the issue of mixing different kind of content in the same stream ? we have namespace for that
edhelas
on my side it's the only solution that I found that doesn't requires big changes server side
edhelas
and I'll not wait for MIX to have such basic features available
rtq3has left
rtq3has joined
Zash
you could have a node with items for all other nodes
Zash
you could have an URI/URL in node metadata
edhelas
this requires to set rights on the other node to publish content and restrict them
edhelas
only the publishers can publish the avatar
edhelas
and url/uri is possible yes, still in the mood of 0084 afaik
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
jonas’
edhelas, as you mentioned yourself: "the only case it's meh is when a getitems is done on the node, then the base64 of the avatar is delivered"
jonas’
item counts will be off, too
jonas’
you have to do additional filtering, interactions with RSM and so on
edhelas
on my implementation, displaying only 9 items and not 10 on one page is "ok"
edhelas
but indeed it's not perfect
edhelas
but RSM with chat message correction can also gives you 28 messages for 30 requested in the end
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
lnjhas left
j.rhas joined
rtq3has left
lumihas joined
efrithas left
pep.
"Seve> @board" < I'm happy it doesn't. That's not something that should be in <body/>
Seve
pep., I don't disagree, but give the feature
Seve
:D
Kev
It should be in body, and then there should be a reference to annotate it.
frainzhas left
pep.
The "@" is metadata, and is not required in body
Zash
You can use it as UI, but then not send it. Like Converse.js
pep.
yep
pep.
Although converse still fails in some cases, but that's the spirit
frainzhas joined
lskdjfhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
edhelas
Zash I'll try out the URL in metadata thing and not publish the base64
no, example 4 in https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0084.html#process-pubmeta
pep.
Why http?
edhelas
where do you want to publish it ?
edhelas
on another pubsub service ? which one ? the same as where the node is ?
edhelas
we don't have any kind of filtering feature when ding disco#items on pubsub service, that's also why I moved comments nodes
edhelas
it is possible but having simple HTTP URL is also fine, this node will only be about pulling data
edhelas
(in my case Movim can even host it)
pep.
So we use http "because my client does it anyway" and it's a really ugly hack just because nobody is pushing for "the right thing"(tm)?
edhelas
0084 allows it, also base64 handling through xml is having limits
edhelas
i don't have control over the upload process of the picture for example
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
lskdjfhas left
lskdjfhas joined
404.cityhas joined
Half-ShotXhas joined
APachhas left
APachhas joined
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
igoosehas left
igoosehas joined
lskdjfhas left
Half-ShotXhas left
lskdjfhas left
moparisthebesthas joined
mightyBroccolihas joined
Half-ShotXhas joined
lnjhas joined
olihas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
lnjhas left
APachhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
jonas’
if I could take one day off to attend the summit remotely, which should I take? 31st or 1st?
Kev
Hard to say. I think often the first day discussions are more intense than the second as we prioritise the stuff more people consider important/interesting.
jonas’
hard trade-off
jonas’
thursday is burger day at work. I’d be missing good burgers.
Holger
>30 participants on the list. Not bad.
Half-ShotXhas left
Seve
Looks very promising this year
Half-ShotXhas joined
frainzhas joined
Ge0rG
And I have no way to get out of this project. I hope for a calm week so I can at least listen in
Nyco has a different nickname? (or maybe it renders differently, with this update I had for my client). As we're not verified by MUC membership, anyone could pop in here now under the name 'Mattj' and vote in his name, right?
Nÿco
sorry, got a backup client, my default one had the bookmark removed, will investigate
ralphm
Guus means: start implementing MIX.
Guus
Doesn't matter Nyco - Just wondering out loud
ralphm
In any case, it uses the same real JID, so we're good.
waqashas joined
ralphm
No takers (haha!)?
ralphm
2. Commitments
ralphm
Call for Editors. jonas’ ?
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Guus
I've seen the call, but no responses, iirc
ralphm
Shall I remove the item?
Guus
I'm not sure what more that we can do, other than keep doing calls
ralphm
And since we're not actually doing them, I'm removing the item.
ralphm
* Clarify how initiate last call for Exp. XEPs
Guus
that was in your PR, right?
ralphm
I put in a Pull Request for this, along with how to actually propose.
ralphm
https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/744
ralphm
It would be nice to get reviews on this.
Guus
I've read and remember agreeing with it - I'll go over it once more after the meeting and +1 on the PR
Guus
do we need an in-meeting vote on this?
ralphm
I put it up for review
ralphm
Don't know what MattJ's handle is
Ge0rG
on github it's @mwild1
Guus
mwild1
ralphm
He doesn't show up as an option, so I'll look into that.
ralphm
It might also be nice to get opinions from the floor
Guus
and council/editors, specifically. They work with this stuff
ralphm
Right
ralphm
* Update Board status on members page
ralphm
This sounds like an 'Alex' item.
Ge0rG
ralphm: might be useful to bring the PR up for Council then. I kind of missed it
Kev
(I've just had a scan of that PR and have issue with it, FWIW, in places)
ralphm
Ge0rG: the point is that Board is the Approving Body.
ralphm
Kev: great, all feedback is welcome
Kev
Board is the approving body, but I think it'd be irresponsible to make significant changes to the standards process without consulting the body responsible for the standards :)
Kev
I don't think there's a rush for this, so I suggest getting it put on Council's agenda too.
Guus
https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/members <-- has board members?
ralphm
Kev: I'm happy for it to be on the Council's agenda.
Kev
Ta.
flowhas joined
ralphm
Guus: right, I'll archive it
Guus
I'm unsure if I read the meaning of "Update Board status on members page" right.
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
APachhas left
Seve
I thought we were talking about the update I did not that long ago
ralphm
Kev: for what it is worth, I had already mentioned this PR on the standards list a week ago.
Kev
ralphm: I think it's worth flagging things explicitly on the Council agenda.
ralphm
Kev: that was the goal already and why we are discussing it. The Council's Chair is invited to Board meetings explicitly for these things.
ralphm
(and also on the Board mailing list)
ralphm
Anyway, I trust it will be discussed in the next Council meeting now. Meanwhile comments are also welcome on the PR. Moving on.
ralphm
3. GSoC
ralphm
flow: updates?
flowhas left
waqashas left
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Half-ShotXhas left
Guus
there's been an announcement, blogpost, wiki page, and revival of the GSoC that's since silent.
APachhas joined
ralphm
right
Guus
https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/GSoC/2019
Guus
no proposals as of yet, it seems
ralphm
The wiki page still has the default templates indeed
I sent out a reminder regarding the removal of vending machines at FOSDEM.
Guus
the hotel signup thingy has expired, so if you're still looking for a place, you'll have to make your own arrangements. You can probably still use Thon EU if you want.
ralphm
So far only 16 responses for Dinner. Another reminder to please fill in the form. No response, no food!
Guus
I'm happy with the turnup at the summit. It's more than last year.
Kev
17
Guus
people should write down suggestions for agenda items on the wiki
Guus
who's this "Allergies: everything but filet mignon" <--??
ralphm
31 registered people for Summit
ralphm
Kev of course
Kev
It was suggested to me, but I didn't.
Half-ShotXhas joined
Guus
moving on?
Guus
I can't stay to long, today
Guus
did we loose ralphm ?
ralphm
no
Guus
yey
ralphm
5. JabberSpam trademark application
ralphm
JabberSPAM actually
Guus
Ge0rG's response to Peter, did that get a response?
Ge0rG
Guus: not from Peter, AFAICT
ralphm
No
ralphm
The project v.s. organization thing is a bit of a thing.
ralphm
I can see how having another organization with Jabber in its name might complicate the trademark situation.
ralphm
And hence why Peter said that might not be a good idea.
Ge0rG
is "that might not be a good idea" equivalent to the board denying the request?
Ge0rG
I'm a bit lost here about how to go on.
Guus
there's precedent for having an org with 'jabber' in it's name, trademarked: https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/jabber-trademark/approved-applications.html
Ge0rG
I wonder if they paid the 500$ fee.
Ge0rG
I actually heard once that the fee was never imposed.
Guus
I can only assume it was, but don't know.
Guus
as on how to go on: I'd like to get Peters feedback, as he's most knowledgable on this
ralphm
Well, as Ge0rG said, it might not fit the description of project either. I am struggling with this myself, and have started reading all the documentation linked from https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/jabber-trademark/background.html
Ge0rG
from a process point of view, it would be great to have this process terminate eventually with an official board response.
Guus
I've read that - there's nothing conclusive in there that I could find.
Guus
best I could reason is that George is putting forward two projects, sharing (part of) a name.
Guus
(the manifesto and the blacklist)
Ge0rG
Guus: this is a question similar to "does a github organization count as an organization in terms of the trademark licensing agreement"
Guus
Ge0rG you're right.
ralphm
https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/jabber-trademark/license-decision-process.html lists the options
APachhas left
Guus
As long as there's no legal representation of the github org ...
vanitasvitaehas left
efrithas joined
Guus
a github organization is not a legal entity, I think.
ralphm
It also says that the XSF Trademark Committee makes this decision.
Ge0rG
the XSF Trademark Committee is Board + Peter?
ralphm
It is comprised of: “a XSF Director and XSF Members who have been authorized by the XSF Board of Directors to manage the trademark licensing program”
ralphm
The former we don't have
Ge0rG
And the latter we don't have either
ralphm
and the latter we may not have explicitly appointed
Guus
so it's up to board to pick up the slack there.
ralphm
I think so to.
ralphm
too
Guus
let's not complicate things furhter.
Ge0rG
If I volunteer to the XSF Trademark Committee, will I be put into a position to decide upon my own request?
ralphm
I tend to have opinions other than Guus and mine.
ralphm
(on anything in this meeting, really)
ralphm
want to have, I meant
Guus
you have other opinions that you? 🙂
Guus
ah 😃
ralphm
FWIW, I tend to approve, if we get the details correct.
Seve
Could that be changed for just Board for example? So we do not have to go though that process
Ge0rG
I would assume that the XSF Trademark Committee implicitly is the XSF Board.
APachhas joined
ralphm
Seve: I suppose Board could appoint Board to be on the Committee.
frainzhas joined
Guus
Seve, I don't think we have to go to that process to begin with.
equilhas joined
ralphm
But I think Board is clearly authorized if it votes on the matter.
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
Ge0rG
I am fully OK with the Board voting on trademark applications.
Ge0rG
Also deciding on whether to ask for one of the fees.
Half-ShotXhas left
Ge0rG
(personally, I'd love to change the process to not demand any fees from non-commercial entities)
ralphm
I'm not considering any changes to the process before understanding how it is currently supposed to work.
Guus
Ge0rG working on the assumption that Peter does not bring up new issues, you change the name on the trademark application to the non-abbreviated name (as you already suggested), and we're licensing to two projects, instead of an organization, I tend to be OK with issuing the trademark. Let's ping Peter, and find out more.
Ge0rG
Guus: I'm not sure whether my mail counts as "pinging Peter"
Guus
I'll ask Peter for an update
Ge0rG
Guus: also one of the open questions was whether the long-name trademark will allow me to use the shortname in URLs
ralphm
Right
ralphm
Thanks Guus
Ge0rG
and that question is kind of blocking for me
ralphm
I understand.
Ge0rG
because if the answer is "no", the whole application stops making much sense.
Guus
I assume it is OK, but would like Peter's feedback on that.
ralphm
Let's try and get more answers for/during next week at the Summit.
ralphm
6. Executive Director (bis)
Ge0rG
thanks!
Half-ShotXhas joined
ralphm
I know we have discussed this at length already, but I've been reading our bylaws, and I'm not too comfortable about the vacancy for this officer.
Guus
what are your concerns?
ralphm
The point is that the bylaws (and e.g. the trademark policy) explicitly mention this role.
ralphm
And it is unclear how things should work in the absence of an ED.
Ge0rG
from the floor, I'd assume that All Of Board needs to make any decisions then.
Half-ShotXhas left
Half-ShotXhas joined
ralphm
Right, but I wonder if that should be made explicit. Unfortunately, we didn't really get much feedback on our previous meeting on this topic, either.
ralphm
The minutes now state: “As of now, Board is executing their decisions themselves. The consensus seems
to be that this mode of operation is fine for now, and there is no extreme
pressure to find a replacement.”
ralphm
I think that is aligned with Ge0rG's comment.
Guus
I'm not to worried about not filling the position, and not change the bylaws either.
ralphm
Ok
Guus
if a problem does occur, we'll have to resort to appointing another ED.
Guus
which will then be problematic, probably.
Guus
but in effect, the ED has been absent for years.
Guus
and/or done nothing in that role
Seve
What problems could be encounter because of that?
Half-ShotXhas left
Guus
it's way past time for me
ralphm
I cannot currently think of one. So maybe we should leave at this for now.
ralphm
7. AOB
Seve
Ok, no problem.
Guus
I'd like to vote on the ED thing asap
Guus
it's been dragging
Guus
AOB: nyco, did you get in touch with that designer friend for the badges?
Ge0rG
Guus: what exactly would you like to vote on?
Guus
Ge0rG to keep the position, but vacant.
Ge0rG
Ah, yeah. The badges. Would be great to have them.
ralphm
Guus: I'll put the vote on for next meeting.
Guus
nyco ?
ralphm
Ge0rG: Postponing that item.
moparisthebesthas left
ralphm
8. Date of Next
Half-ShotXhas joined
Guus
lets do +2w
ralphm
Next week is the Summit. We may meet in person, but I'm not scheduling a meeting.
ralphm
Suggesting +2W
Ge0rG
(also better for Minutes and following in here)
ralphm
Ge0rG: any formal meeting would also be in here
Seve
Unfortunately I will not attend Summit nor Fosdem this year, so I'm okay with what you suggest