XSF Discussion - 2019-03-28

  1. oli has left

  2. oli has joined

  3. oli has left

  4. oli has joined

  5. oli has left

  6. oli has joined

  7. oli has left

  8. oli has joined

  9. oli has left

  10. oli has joined

  11. larma has joined

  12. lskdjf has joined

  13. oli has left

  14. oli has joined

  15. david has joined

  16. Wojtek has left

  17. Lance has joined

  18. karoshi has left

  19. oli has left

  20. oli has joined

  21. UsL has left

  22. UsL has joined

  23. alexis has joined

  24. lskdjf has left

  25. lskdjf has joined

  26. rtq3 has left

  27. alexis has left

  28. alexis has joined

  29. alexis has left

  30. alexis has joined

  31. alexis has left

  32. alexis has joined

  33. lumi has left

  34. lskdjf has left

  35. alexis has left

  36. alexis has joined

  37. alexis has left

  38. alexis has joined

  39. alexis has left

  40. alexis has joined

  41. waqas has joined

  42. yvo has left

  43. alexis has left

  44. alexis has joined

  45. Yagiza has joined

  46. alexis has left

  47. alexis has joined

  48. larma has left

  49. alexis has left

  50. alexis has joined

  51. alexis has left

  52. alexis has joined

  53. alexis has left

  54. alexis has joined

  55. waqas has left

  56. kokonoe has left

  57. kokonoe has joined

  58. alexis has left

  59. alexis has joined

  60. alexis has left

  61. alexis has joined

  62. ta has left

  63. ta has joined

  64. alexis has left

  65. alexis has joined

  66. neshtaxmpp has joined

  67. alexis has left

  68. alexis has joined

  69. oli has left

  70. alexis has left

  71. arc has left

  72. arc has joined

  73. sree has joined

  74. sree has left

  75. lskdjf has joined

  76. Nekit has joined

  77. lskdjf has left

  78. oli has joined

  79. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  80. Lance has left

  81. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  82. rion has left

  83. rion has joined

  84. kokonoe has left

  85. Lance has joined

  86. j.r has left

  87. kokonoe has joined

  88. j.r has joined

  89. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  90. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  91. j.r has left

  92. j.r has joined

  93. goffi has joined

  94. arc has left

  95. arc has joined

  96. bowlofeggs has left

  97. j.r has left

  98. Lance has left

  99. lskdjf has joined

  100. oli has left

  101. oli has joined

  102. lnj has joined

  103. lskdjf has left

  104. Lance has joined

  105. larma has joined

  106. lskdjf has joined

  107. Nekit has left

  108. Nekit has joined

  109. mikaela has joined

  110. andy has joined

  111. andy has left

  112. andy has joined

  113. Nekit has left

  114. Nekit has joined

  115. blabla has joined

  116. lskdjf has left

  117. mikaela has left

  118. larma has left

  119. mikaela has joined

  120. jcbrand has joined

  121. lovetox has joined

  122. Lance has left

  123. intosi has joined

  124. flow

    I can't remember the last time a standards@ thread triggered carlo

  125. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  126. wurstsalat has left

  127. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  128. larma has joined

  129. oli has left

  130. MattJ


  131. lskdjf has joined

  132. Guus

    > Within the limitations of XMPP, your ideas are among the least worst. Can we have motivational posters printed with this one, please?

  133. jonas’


  134. karoshi has joined

  135. Dele Olajide has joined

  136. Dele Olajide has left

  137. Dele Olajide has joined

  138. wurstsalat has joined

  139. Steve Kille has left

  140. lorddavidiii has joined

  141. Steve Kille has joined

  142. arc has left

  143. arc has joined

  144. lskdjf has left

  145. lorddavidiii has left

  146. goffi has left

  147. goffi has joined

  148. goffi has left

  149. kokonoe has left

  150. kokonoe has joined

  151. mfoss has joined

  152. mfoss has left

  153. ThibG has left

  154. ThibG has joined

  155. Seve


  156. dwd

    Seve, Thanks for this. I've not looked when the WG meeting itself is, I thought I might listen in.

  157. yvo has joined

  158. Seve

    dwd, meeting happening now, I can't follow it but the room is this one: mls@jabber.ietf.org

  159. Seve

    More slides are being shared there

  160. dwd

    Ah - you'll want the audio etc too.

  161. dwd

    But I don't think I really understand more than one word in five when they start the serious cryptography.

  162. Seve


  163. Seve

    Yeah, there's audio stream available as well, but I'm at work anyway, can't follow anything (implying I would understand something, which is most probably not :D)

  164. pep.

    PFF you're away from the list one day and there's already a full thread on markup formats

  165. yvo has left

  166. ThibG has left

  167. ThibG has joined

  168. Zash

    Was a week ago a good time to poke someone about https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-acme-email-tls ?

  169. rtq3 has joined

  170. debacle has joined

  171. rtq3 has left

  172. rtq3 has joined

  173. Ge0rG has left

  174. larma has left

  175. Ge0rG has joined

  176. Ge0rG has left

  177. Ge0rG has joined

  178. Ge0rG has left

  179. Ge0rG has joined

  180. Ge0rG has left

  181. Ge0rG has joined

  182. Ge0rG has left

  183. Ge0rG has joined

  184. Ge0rG has left

  185. Ge0rG has joined

  186. Ge0rG has left

  187. Ge0rG has joined

  188. Ge0rG has left

  189. Ge0rG has joined

  190. Ge0rG has left

  191. Ge0rG has joined

  192. rtq3 has left

  193. rtq3 has joined

  194. Ge0rG has left

  195. Ge0rG has joined

  196. Ge0rG has left

  197. Ge0rG has joined

  198. Ge0rG has left

  199. Ge0rG has joined

  200. Ge0rG has left

  201. Ge0rG has joined

  202. Ge0rG has left

  203. Ge0rG has joined

  204. Ge0rG has left

  205. Ge0rG has joined

  206. Ge0rG has left

  207. Ge0rG has joined

  208. Ge0rG has left

  209. Ge0rG has joined

  210. david has left

  211. flow

    dwd, appreciate your email response to evgeny

  212. Guus

    as did I.

  213. flow

    Although I have to admit that evgeny's mail made me chuckle.

  214. flow

    But yeah, neither carlo's email nor the response added much or even any value to the discussion

  215. Guus

    Let's not single out one person - there's a lot of this going on, sadly.

  216. Guus

    It causes me (and thus very likely others) to not participate in discussions like this.

  217. Guus

    which hurts standards development (not that I'm bringing to much to the table, but if more people are discouraged, this becomes an issue real fast).

  218. Guus

    I literally discarded a draft email to that thread, for "I don't want to waste time arguing right now" reasons.

  219. Ge0rG

    the whole thread was tl;dr. Am I missing out on drama?

  220. igoose has left

  221. igoose has joined

  222. flow

    Feels more like a holy war than drama

  223. Guus

    much of the same: "everything is broken and you're not dipshits for even considering other options than my solution."

  224. Guus

    it's... discouraging.

  225. flow

    I tend to believe that this is something that can not be settled in a discussion, but has to be settled by the ecosystem

  226. Guus

    much of the same: "everything is broken and you're dipshits for even considering other options than my solution."

  227. oli has joined

  228. Guus

    flow I tend to agree. Sadly, implemenation in the ecosystem takes time, which fuels the 'why isn't this fixed yet' thought.

  229. dwd

    There's a conversation about behaviour in technical debate in the IETF list at the moment, but I'll say here what I'm currently writing there:

  230. dwd

    Yes, people should not be assholes - because it's vastly less efficient as well as the more obvious social things.

  231. Guus

    "... and you're all dipshits for not taking my word for that!" <-- right? 😉

  232. MattJ

    To be fair, maybe I missed something, but apart from two emails I found the discussions quite constructive so far

  233. dwd

    But also, it's worth picking out the technical argument from things and treating it independently from the aggression.

  234. Guus

    MattJ I'm not ruling out I've started to be oversensitive at a certain pressure point.

  235. dwd

    MattJ, I could cheerfully point out several emails in there that I felt added very little, if anything, to the technical debate.

  236. dwd

    MattJ, And, in addition, had a distinctly aggressive air.

  237. Seve

    "Please, everyone, ensure your messages are like an efficient light bulb - optimise for light, not heat." very spot on :D I like it very much (and it works with the jabber icon)

  238. flow

    MattJ, possibly. I also found the thread to be civilized for large parts. The "holy war" remark was not meant towards that specific thread, but the situation regarding rich(?) text in XMPP as whole.

  239. Zash

    Can we un-deprecate 71?

  240. neshtaxmpp has left

  241. neshtaxmpp has joined

  242. MattJ

    We can do anything, if you can convince the council

  243. kokonoe has left

  244. neshtaxmpp has left

  245. neshtaxmpp has joined

  246. kokonoe has joined

  247. Guus

    It was deprecated solely because of the security implications, right? Specifically: that it's very complex to have an implementation that is secure.

  248. Guus

    Even though the spec itself does not have obvious security issues.

  249. Zash

    And the security problems are in the Web, not the spec. "Not markdown" has the same problems.

  250. MattJ

    Also the same web clients that had security flaws in their XHTML-IM often also had security flaws elsewhere (like not escaping nicknames)

  251. MattJ

    nothing to do with XHTML-IM

  252. Zash

    In fact, you can get the same problems without rich text support

  253. MattJ

    But not using XHTML-IM invites people to just dump it into the DOM

  254. MattJ

    But using XHTML-IM invites people to just dump it into the DOM

  255. MattJ

    waqas wrote a safe sanitizer for it, fwiw, and it's not complex

  256. Zash

    People will just dump "not markdown" through a markdown lib into HTML and dump that into the DOM

  257. dwd

    Well, the feeling in Council wasm't that XHTML-IM was the sole source of security issues, it was that it was very hard to avoid security issues.

  258. MattJ

    (it's linked from the modernxmpp docs)

  259. dwd

    And, in addition, that many uses of XHTML-IM went beyond the subset it mandates anyway.

  260. Guus

    I'm biased on this. Good thing I'm not on council 🙂

  261. alacer has joined

  262. Guus

    not biased - but I'm undecided.

  263. MattJ

    The opposite of biased? :)

  264. Guus

    I can't make up my mind.

  265. MattJ

    I agree it's not a simple issue

  266. Guus

    And if you're making fun of my English, I move that we start using Dutch as the primary language in here. Where I have the same problem, but at least you won't notice then. 😉

  267. MattJ

    However I tend to agree with Andrew Nenakhov that we shouldn't artificially limit what can be done (e.g. about text in hyperlinks)

  268. Guus needs moar coffee.

  269. MattJ

    Otherwise people will just make up their own stuff which will probably be worse in the long run

  270. alacer has left

  271. alacer has joined

  272. Guus


  273. dwd

    I'm also a big fan of "I've implemented this and it works".

  274. MattJ


  275. debacle has left

  276. dwd

    Not saying we should just adopt those ideas wholesale and verbatim, but it does strongly suggest there's some solid ideas to get from the work.

  277. MattJ

    Also the argument that OOB exists and works isn't accurate, OOB is a hack implemented by Conversations and adopted by others

  278. MattJ

    I'm not against OOB (in fact I like it), but Conversations has broken it (<desc> can't be used, for example)

  279. dwd

    Also it's implemented by others is wildly varying ways - I've been doing a lot with it recently.

  280. dwd

    Gajim, for example, requires the URL in the <body/> to triger rendering the OOB.

  281. MattJ

    That's from Conversations

  282. MattJ


  283. MattJ

    I guess "and Gajim" can be added there

  284. Zash

    That behavior originated in Conversations

  285. MattJ

    and there are two reasons, one of which is that Daniel didn't want to have to change the DB schema :)

  286. Zash

    And before that it was just the URL by itself in <body>

  287. MattJ

    The other is that it's a sensible fallback, and ensures that a user of a fallback client client doesn't lose any info

  288. pep.

    "I'm also a big fan of "I've implemented this and it works".", Poezio and gajim have implemented xhtml-im and it works :P

  289. MattJ


  290. jonas’

    10:39:10 dwd> I'm also a big fan of "I've implemented this and it works".

  291. jonas’

    I’m not

  292. jonas’

    especially not with influential implementations.

  293. jonas’

    because it’s typically already deployed in the wild at that point and then everyone *has* to follow suit

  294. jonas’

    (Styling intended)

  295. pep.

    Yeah, I'm also half-half on that, mostly because of what jonas’ says

  296. dwd

    Hence the follow-up statement.

  297. pep.

    I need to reply to that thread anyway.. noticed a few funny statements (if only a few)

  298. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  299. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  300. lovetox

    you dont understand the reasons behind the oob thing

  301. lovetox

    also its weird dwd that you want to control what the client of another person shows or does

  302. lovetox

    its really nothing you should think about

  303. alacer has left

  304. lovetox

    btw you dont have to use oob at all with Gajim, if the user chooses he can let Gajim show and load *all* links, it doesnt matter if they have a oob element or not

  305. oli has left

  306. Ge0rG

    The Web is so great, we can't do XMPP without it.

  307. oli has joined

  308. 404.city Support has joined

  309. 404.city has joined

  310. rtq3 has left

  311. dwd

    lovetox, I'd just like to send an image to someone. It's not about controlling if the user sees it inline or not, it's about expressing intent.

  312. dwd

    lovetox, Compare and contrast with RFC 2183, which allows people to indicate if the MIME part is intended to be an attached file or an inline portion of the message.

  313. oli has left

  314. oli has joined

  315. debacle has joined

  316. oli has left

  317. oli has joined

  318. andy has left

  319. oli has left

  320. oli has joined

  321. lovetox

    yes your intent is declared when you use oob

  322. lovetox

    you dont need to follow body==oob url logic

  323. oli has left

  324. oli has joined

  325. peter has joined

  326. rtq3 has joined

  327. lovetox

    if a user uses http upload to share a picture, he communicates a URL, i as a client add a oob tag to tell another client, that the intent is a shared image that the user specifically uploaded, so not a copy paste of URL from somewhere

  328. lovetox

    because we also need a fallback for clients that dont support oob, this results in oob url == body

  329. lovetox

    for this particular case of sharing something

  330. alacer has joined

  331. lovetox

    that does not mean that oob cant be used in other ways , like adding a description

  332. lovetox

    if your client has support for adding a description to uploaded content, tell me and i will make it look good in Gajim

  333. lovetox

    i didnt saw something like that though until now

  334. MattJ

    lovetox, the problem is that if you put anything in <desc> it is ignored by Conversations, and any other client

  335. MattJ

    so the sensible thing to do would be to put the <desc> content also in <body> for fallback clients

  336. lovetox

    yeah and? open a issue on their tracker for it

  337. MattJ

    But then Conversations will stop displaying it inline

  338. MattJ

    Daniel knows about it and doesn't want to fix it, because it would require a schema change in the Conversations database

  339. lovetox

    yeah and?! Because one client does not support something now we stop using it?

  340. MattJ

    I mean, he didn't say he would never fix it, but it's not priority, and it means that <desc> can't be used in practice today

  341. lovetox

    i dont get this kind of argument

  342. MattJ

    Tell that to all the users of Conversations :)

  343. dwd

    lovetox, But opening an issue on the tracker would surely be trying to control how a client presents some data?

  344. MattJ

    "When your client sends me a message, it doesn't display"

  345. Zash

    "It doesn't work in IE"

  346. lovetox

    then he doesnt see the description

  347. lovetox

    whats the difference to now where you cant add one

  348. lovetox

    because it doesnt show it inline anymore

  349. lovetox

    so you want to control how the image is displayed

  350. Zash

    If you wanna make everything worse, send the description in a separate message.

  351. lorddavidiii has joined

  352. oli has left

  353. oli has joined

  354. oli has left

  355. oli has joined

  356. oli has left

  357. oli has joined

  358. oli has left

  359. oli has joined

  360. blabla has left

  361. oli has left

  362. oli has joined

  363. rtq3 has left

  364. oli has left

  365. oli has joined

  366. lorddavidiii has left

  367. andy has joined

  368. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: didn't you intend to post to standards@ about MUC Avatars and how to move forward?

  369. rtq3 has joined

  370. Zash

    Didn't I intent to just load mod_pep onto a MUC and call it a day?

  371. oli has left

  372. Steve Kille has left

  373. Kev has left

  374. Steve Kille has joined

  375. Kev has joined

  376. oli has joined

  377. oli has left

  378. oli has joined

  379. rtq3 has left

  380. Seve

    >yeah and?! Because one client does not support something now we stop using it? Out of context somebody would think we should rename XMPP to Conversations :)

  381. Ge0rG

    "ejabberd - a Conversations™ compatible server"

  382. Ge0rG

    It would be funny if it wasn't about the abuse of trademarks and the sad state of XMPP.

  383. wurstsalat has left

  384. Andrew Nenakhov

    Well since xmpp stands for messaging and *Presence* protocol, I could hardly call Conversations an XMPP client at all 😂 XMP, or XMPp at best

  385. david has joined

  386. pep.

    "MattJ> But then Conversations will stop displaying it inline" maybe someday we'll finally rename to The Conversations Protocol.

  387. jonas’

    conversations does funny things when you simply slap an OOB tag on all the links

  388. pep.

    Well that's a conversations problem..

  389. wurstsalat has joined

  390. Andrew Nenakhov

    Btw, is it just me unable to find a setting, or there are no roster groups at all?

  391. Zash

    What do you mean?

  392. flow

    Andrew Nenakhov, possibly there are not roster groups at all

  393. Zash

    Define "roster groups"

  394. Seve

    They are, but look like tags, I think

  395. flow

    you don't have to add every aspect of the protocol to your (G)UI, and some argue that they do more harm than good

  396. Andrew Nenakhov

    Seve, I can't find even tags now

  397. oli has left

  398. dwd

    Roster groups in COnversations are indeed displayed as tags. It's a reasonable rendering of what they are, in fairness.

  399. 404.city has left

  400. 404.city Support has left

  401. Andrew Nenakhov

    I agree with that semantically they are tags. I just somehow don't see them at all now.

  402. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  403. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  404. Zash

    There's a setting somewhere that make them show up in the "start conversation" view

  405. Ge0rG

    How does Xabber handle roster groups? And how are they named in the UI?

  406. Andrew Nenakhov

    Like it should. ☝️

  407. Ge0rG


  408. blabla has joined

  409. jubalh has joined

  410. jonas’

    Andrew Nenakhov, oh, so you’re doing tags, too? :)

  411. Andrew Nenakhov

    Of course, no )

  412. jonas’

    hm, I find tags much more useful

  413. Andrew Nenakhov

    My co-workers don't. We are using Xabber for Web as a daily driver desktop chat app. Briefly experimented with tag based groups, quicky dropped cause everyone hated it

  414. peter has left

  415. Andrew Nenakhov

    So like, 'redsolution' shared roster groups to list all active colleagues and their presences, 'developers' 'managers'

  416. Ge0rG

    +1 for tags. Just to annoy Андрей.

  417. lumi has joined

  418. yvo has joined

  419. Maranda has left

  420. Maranda has joined

  421. Andrew Nenakhov


  422. valo has left

  423. Ge0rG

    the concept of a contact list is deprecated anyway. all you need is a search/address bar where you can type things.

  424. Andrew Nenakhov

    Tell that to my managers, lol

  425. Ge0rG

    aren't you the manager? I thought so...

  426. Andrew Nenakhov

    Then tell me how far they've sent you

  427. jonas’

    Andrew Nenakhov, https://sotecware.net/files/mlxc/02-tagsinput.webm FWIW

  428. valo has joined

  429. Ge0rG

    Andrew Nenakhov: or is everybody managed by FSB now?

  430. Andrew Nenakhov

    jonas’, the main use pattern of using groups was to scroll over them to see who's online, sorted by relevant groups.

  431. jonas’

    Andrew Nenakhov, I see

  432. jonas’

    I became headaches when thinking about how to deal with the situation where a user attempts to do conflicting changes to the same contact in multiple groups

  433. jonas’

    and I prefer the tags UI anyways

  434. Andrew Nenakhov

    jonas’, like, what conflicting changes?

  435. jonas’

    Andrew Nenakhov, or to put it another way: I found it to be confusing behaviour when changing a contacts name in one group affects the contact in another group

  436. Andrew Nenakhov

    jonas’, I don't find it confusing. Maybe because I have good interfaces.

  437. jonas’


  438. Ge0rG

    if it's a tree, it's confusing.

  439. Ge0rG

    because you imply that one contact is multiple leafs.

  440. Ge0rG

    and if it's not a tree but a DAG, it's even more confusing because nobody will understand that.

  441. lovetox

    hm tags sound like a good idea

  442. jonas’

    lovetox, I think they are! https://sotecware.net/files/mlxc/02-tagsinput.webm

  443. Ge0rG

    lovetox: please fix the dialogs where a JID is split into locapart and domain first

  444. jonas’

    I have another clip somewhere where I showcase the UI to manage tags on a contact, but I can’t seem to find it

  445. Andrew Nenakhov

    jonas’, anyway, I fully understand the reasoning behind tags approach. It just didn't stick with my personnel do we dropped that option for now

  446. andy has left

  447. andy has joined

  448. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  449. alacer has left

  450. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  451. Alex has left

  452. jubalh has left

  453. andy has left

  454. jubalh has joined

  455. oli has joined

  456. andy has joined

  457. G0s+ has joined

  458. lovetox

    Ge0rG the account creation dialog is on my list

  459. Nekit has left

  460. Nekit has joined

  461. Ge0rG

    lovetox: I recently encountered it in the Join MUC dialog

  462. lovetox

    but it is a big thing, because it contains so many workflows

  463. Ge0rG

    lovetox: also are you following https://docs.modernxmpp.org ?

  464. lovetox

    IBR, Anonymous registration, proxy settings etc

  465. lovetox

    this must all be done in this one dialog

  466. Ge0rG

    account creation is kind of special, because you need to specify the server first

  467. Ge0rG

    Also: https://github.com/modernxmpp/modernxmpp/issues/7

  468. bowlofeggs has joined

  469. jubalh has left

  470. lovetox

    if you think about it, to have a really good account creation/adding GUI you need to support a shitload of things

  471. rtq3 has joined

  472. lovetox

    you need Forms support with nice looking GUI, you need catpcha support with Forms, you need BOSH, http proxys, socks5 proxies, a lib that supports IBR really good with giving meaningful errors if something does not work

  473. Lance has joined

  474. lovetox

    and at last you need to handle the 7 different allowed methods that a server can offer you the IBR registration

  475. Ge0rG

    lovetox: what's your point, again?

  476. MattJ

    lovetox, if there really are 7 (which I hope not), I'm pretty confident you can ignore some of those

  477. lovetox

    that it sounds trivial to make a good add/creation dialog

  478. lovetox

    but it entails many things to do it really good

  479. MattJ

    I can think of simple (no form), form, or out-of-band

  480. Zash

    MattJ: Don't look at mod_register_redirect

  481. MattJ

    lovetox, would really appreciate anything you can bring to the modernxmpp docs

  482. Ge0rG

    lovetox: I never claimed it's easy :D

  483. lovetox

    MattJ i referred to the table of death in the IBR xep

  484. Ge0rG

    my own client only implements half-a-method

  485. MattJ


  486. mimi89999 has left

  487. MattJ

    It doesn't actually seem that bad

  488. Ge0rG

    out-of-band registration _is_ bad.

  489. MattJ

    The table is possibly a little excessive. For a client that supports forms, it's basically telling you to always use that if the server offers it

  490. Ge0rG

    I mean it's working more or less on PCs, where it's not so hard to type a username and a password, but it really sucks on mobile

  491. pep.

    Ge0rG, agreed

  492. Ge0rG

    _especially_ if you need to solve some 64px klingon captcha on your 1080p 4" display.

  493. Ge0rG

    (which reminds me of the misdesigned xmpp compliance badges with the tiny fonts)

  494. Zash

    And guess how many clients actually support anything but username+password

  495. pep.

    You're making me sad

  496. Ge0rG


  497. jonas’

    Ge0rG, by "number installed" instead of "number of software projects"? likely! :)

  498. Zash

    This is where it turns out those 3 are the libpurple ones.

  499. Ge0rG

    somebody write an android transverter from data forms to ui widges

  500. Zash


  501. Zash

    Pidgin supports dataforms

  502. Zash

    Or, some sort of extended IBR at least

  503. mimi89999 has joined

  504. Guus

    Board: I'm getting a service person visiting my house somewhere today. He hasn't been here yet. Luck shall have it that he'll arrive just when the board meeting starts.

  505. Guus

    I might be unresponsive.

  506. MattJ

    Noted, thanks!

  507. Ge0rG

    I've heard that moparisthebest volunteers for the Editor role.

  508. Zash

    Yeah it's the form.

  509. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  510. karoshi has left

  511. kokonoe has left

  512. karoshi has joined

  513. kokonoe has joined

  514. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  515. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  516. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  517. goffi has joined

  518. Guus

    That guy is pulling up now.

  519. Guus

    Impeccable timing

  520. Guus


  521. Seve

    MattJ, feels like it's just you and me

  522. dwd

    Your friendly ex-officio COuncil Chair is here too.

  523. nyco


  524. Ge0rG

    that Council Chair could do their voting duty as well :D

  525. dwd

    Ge0rG, Yeah.

  526. MattJ


  527. ralphm bangs gavel

  528. ralphm

    0. Welcome + agenda

  529. ralphm

    Who? What?

  530. MattJ


  531. Seve is here!

  532. ralphm

    Seve: I think you had something to say about the agenda?

  533. Seve

    Yes ralphm.

  534. Seve

    I moved a bit the items that we have for discussion to give them some time as well. I was fearing that we would stick to juts one and don't discuss the rest.

  535. Seve


  536. Dele Olajide has left

  537. Alex has joined

  538. dele has joined

  539. ralphm


  540. Seve

    Some of them look like they need less time than others, so I thought this would be a good idea to have things done.

  541. MattJ

    Sounds good

  542. ralphm

    1. Minute taker

  543. ralphm


  544. dwd

    I will, sadly, be disappearing into a meeting shortly, sorry.

  545. ralphm


  546. ralphm


  547. Lance has left

  548. Guus

    I'm back

  549. ralphm

    Had network issues.

  550. ralphm

    Back, too.

  551. ralphm

    2. Server outage post-mortem

  552. ralphm

    Guus' point

  553. Guus

    We've discussed this two weeks ago, iirc

  554. ralphm

    Right, I wasn't sure if it needs to be on here still.

  555. MattJ

    We did. Not sure we actually got anywhere though, or if there is anywhere left to go

  556. Seve

    Don't recall any action

  557. Guus

    I'd like to see if we want have improvements, and if so, discuss how we improve things.

  558. Guus

    ralphm volunteered to talk to intosi during practice about this.

  559. Guus

    (unsure what practice)

  560. ralphm

    Indeed I did, and haven't yet, so I will try today.

  561. ralphm

    We have rehearsals on Thursdays, me on drums, him on bass.

  562. ralphm

    3. Automagically merge PRs from authors.

  563. Guus

    Let's, as board, decide if we want things to improve somehow

  564. andy has left

  565. Guus

    if not, we need no furhter action

  566. Guus

    if so, we should facilitate furhter action.

  567. ralphm


  568. Guus

    ah, we're moving on.

  569. ralphm

    Guus: I'll first have that chat.

  570. ralphm

    (and put it as a todo in Trello)

  571. dwd

    Presumably you'd want to merge only on Experimental?

  572. MattJ

    dwd, yes

  573. MattJ

    This was prompted by a remark from zinid, and how he's frustrated by the round-trip times regarding publishing to (Experimental) specs where he is the author

  574. MattJ

    He'd like to commit, and see it rendered

  575. ralphm

    How would you implement this? Just allow authors merge control and have them merge themselves?

  576. MattJ

    My counter was that PRs are a typical workflow in just about any open-source project

  577. Ge0rG

    Is that worth the trouble of implementing some kind of access control system?

  578. MattJ

    Well right now the Editors are the access control system

  579. ralphm

    If he just wants to have things rendered, local rendering works just fine for me?

  580. MattJ

    ralphm, rendered for others to reference as well

  581. Ge0rG

    You can rather easily publish the rendered html

  582. MattJ

    Ge0rG, not on xmpp.org, obviously

  583. ralphm

    MattJ: do you have an idea on this would work?

  584. ralphm


  585. Guus

    If we can automate more, I don't see harm in doing that. If the task of automating things takes more resources than doing things manually the next few years, I see no point in automating stuff.

  586. Ge0rG

    MattJ: obviously. But replacing the editors with some kind of bot that can check the identity of a github user against the author field in the XEP is not trivial

  587. MattJ

    I'd like to hear Editor feedback on this idea - I know jonas has made a lot of progress with automation

  588. Guus

    a second pair of eyes before we _publish_ things seems desirable, though.

  589. Guus

    What's there for board to decide, here?

  590. MattJ

    I'm just relaying feedback from an author, that the times between submission and publication can be long, and trying to avoid the "but we're all volunteers" response

  591. Guus

    if Editors choose to further automate things, yey for them.

  592. ralphm

    I'd be ok for the Editors to form their opinion on this and change (or not change) their processes accordingly.

  593. MattJ

    Guus, Board oversees the submission process, so I think it's a relevant point to receive feedback on that process from the people using it

  594. Guus

    we should try and optimize things, sure. People could also volunteer to take up the role of Editor - something that was requested repeatedly.

  595. ralphm

    I don't think it really affects our procedures.

  596. Guus

    MattJ I don't see this as a process change though?

  597. ralphm

    Guus: agreed, more Editors FTW

  598. MattJ

    Guus, not necessarily, no

  599. MattJ

    But you did make the comment about "a second pair of eyes"

  600. MattJ

    Anyway, if we want to conclude that this is up to Editors, that's fine by me

  601. Guus

    I'm not against automation at all. If Editors want this, and if we find someone to do the automation, by all means.

  602. ralphm

    MattJ: I do think for now this is up to the Editors

  603. MattJ

    Sounds good to me

  604. yvo has left

  605. ralphm

    4. High Profile XMPP Uses

  606. ralphm

    I saw a bunch of things on Trello, what do we need to discuss?

  607. Seve

    We were brainstorming, to put it simple, I think.

  608. Seve

    Trying to figure out what can we offer to these "High Profile XMPP Users"

  609. Guus

    I'd like to see a plan developed that leads to someone reaching out to organisations.

  610. Guus

    we can discuss that plan. 🙂

  611. Nekit has left

  612. Nekit has joined

  613. ralphm

    Right, in that case, let's put it at the top for next week.

  614. ralphm

    5. Tigase & XMPP Logo

  615. ralphm

    nyco: what's this?

  616. nyco

    they wanna use the logo, asking for authorisation

  617. Guus

    This is explicitly about the XMPP logo, and not related to the Jabber trademark?

  618. nyco

    yep, I could ask, to double check

  619. dwd

    The logo is, IIRC, public domain isn't it?

  620. ralphm

    I *think* it is licensed Expat/MIT

  621. Guus

    I was going to *think* the same.

  622. Guus

    do we have that written down somewhere? 🙂

  623. MattJ

    I was pretty sure so, but I can't find any reference right now

  624. ralphm

    We have had. From my recollection it falls under our IPR policy. Would be good if stpeter remembers.

  625. ralphm

    I'll send an e-mail to ask

  626. dwd

    In any case, the copyright is owned by the XSF, so you can license it however you like, I think.

  627. ralphm

    Yes, but if we already have, it would be nice to know which one we used.

  628. Guus

    let's ask Peter, and make sure to re-instate a description on the website.

  629. Guus

    for future reference.

  630. jubalh has joined

  631. Seve


  632. Guus

    Can we preemptively tell Tigase that they can use it?

  633. MattJ

    Seems fine to me

  634. ralphm


  635. Guus

    seems like we need to figure out the 'how', not the 'if' they can use it.

  636. nyco

    I'd say yes, I use it without asking... should I remove it?

  637. Guus

    no point in making them wait for that, right?

  638. ralphm

    I think that's it.

  639. nyco

    agree Guus

  640. nyco

    agree, Guus

  641. ralphm

    6. AOB

  642. ralphm


  643. MattJ

    None here

  644. Guus

    nyco can you tell Tigase?

  645. nyco

    I will

  646. Guus

    next week DST

  647. Guus

    for ... everyone?

  648. ralphm

    7. Date of Next

  649. ralphm


  650. MattJ


  651. Guus


  652. ralphm

    8. Close

  653. ralphm

    Thanks all!

  654. ralphm bangs gavel

  655. nyco

    change of time

  656. ralphm

    nyco: you missed the DST comment?

  657. nyco

    I failed to understand...

  658. ralphm

    Daylight Savings Time

  659. nyco

    that's +1 then

  660. ralphm


  661. Guus

    all board members will meet at the same time-of-day as today.

  662. nyco

    that's clearer for my poor mind

  663. rtq3 has left

  664. ralphm

    Please, can somebody retroactively make minutes from this?

  665. Guus

    it'll just not be 7 times 24 hours later, and for US-based people, the time-of-day changes, as compared to today.

  666. rtq3 has joined

  667. Guus

    The XSF Events calendar has the right agenda item for the board meeting - just follow that, and you're fine. 🙂

  668. ralphm

    Guus: it is pinned to local time, right?

  669. Guus

    yes. It is pinned to local (I think London) time, and explicitly not to UTC.

  670. waqas has joined

  671. nyco

    weird, in scifi movies, when a spaceship reaches a planet, no one ever asks about time and timezones, they just land earth should do the same: one unique time for the whole planet, no timezone, just a "planetzone" and yes, some countries would have their mornings at 0:00 and some would go party in the night at 07:00 😉

  672. MattJ

    UTC, yes

  673. Ge0rG

    the EU is trying that right now.

  674. MattJ


  675. peter has joined

  676. nyco

    (and the reference point would be Paris, of course...)

  677. Guus

    nyco whenever a spaceship arrives at a planet, they can raise the relevant ruling party immediately. They're not even in the bathroom, ever, let alone asleep.

  678. Ge0rG

    But unfortunately, it's harder to change the local starting time of events than the offset of local time to the sun.

  679. jubalh has left

  680. nyco

    in the future, the human does no pee anymore

  681. Guus


  682. Zash

    Viva das .Beat

  683. ralphm

    Time in Star Trek is complicated.

  684. Ge0rG

    ralphm: s/in Star Trek//

  685. ralphm

    I think in general they use a 24h clock, but DS9 is on a 26h day schedule (to align with Bajor)

  686. Zash

    It's all wibbly-wobbly

  687. Guus

    Interstellar (the movie) is fun with time. Unsure if it's accurate, but it's fun.

  688. Alex has left

  689. Ge0rG

    ralphm: yes, they are using their cis-male-privileged Earth time everywhere.

  690. larma has joined

  691. ralphm

  692. Guus

    I've started re-reruns of voyager - amazed to find that the borg don't play a role at all in the first few seasons. Totally forgot about that.

  693. Ge0rG

    8472 is my favorite species.

  694. Neustradamus

    About XEP-0308: Last Message Correction : https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0308.html -> It is not specified about log, when we changed the last message, the log has 2 entries (not only 1), it is possible to add a solution?

  695. Ge0rG

    (it also happens to be a TCP port that's not on the nmap top1000 list)

  696. Ge0rG

    Neustradamus: what log?

  697. Guus

    the weak will perish.

  698. Ge0rG

    but TNG was peak Star Trek anyway. VOY had a horrible ending, and DS9 was merely space soap opera

  699. Neustradamus

    Ge0rG: Log in the client and saved by the server

  700. Ge0rG

    Neustradamus: fix the client?

  701. Neustradamus

    It is not specified in the XEP no? The problem is for server and client no?

  702. Neustradamus

    Test 1

  703. Neustradamus

    Test 2

  704. Zash

    Discovery is pretty nice so far

  705. Neustradamus

    look here: http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/2019-03-28

  706. Ge0rG

    Neustradamus: I think it's by design.

  707. Neustradamus

    It is an example on this XMPP software server, but it is for other XMPP server softwares too.

  708. Ge0rG

    The prosody log display might need support for LMC

  709. Neustradamus

    Holger (for ejabberd), Kev (for M-Link), Guus (for Openfire), MattJ (for Prosody), what do you think?

  710. Guus

    I like Discovery too.

  711. Nekit has left

  712. Nekit has joined

  713. waqas has left

  714. MattJ

    Neustradamus, I think... patches welcome

  715. j.r has joined

  716. MattJ

    I'm working on higher priority things right now

  717. Neustradamus

    The XEP must be patched for it for have a 1.0.1, we are ok?

  718. lovetox

    Neustradamus you want to replace a message when you correct it?

  719. lovetox

    then you lose the information what was corrected

  720. lovetox

    so the client cant show you what the message was before it was corrected

  721. lovetox

    why do you think the server should do this? the client can fuse the messages after receiving it

  722. Neustradamus

    To have only the last message in log, not the old message and the new message, example the Test 1 -> Test 2 for minutes ago, there are 2 entries in log.

  723. Ge0rG

    A log on the web is a different thing than a server archive.

  724. Zash

    (Technically, that is the server archive, with some transform)

  725. Ge0rG

    Yes. But then you can instrument the Some Transform.

  726. Zash

    You can. Have fun!

  727. Nekit has left

  728. Nekit has joined

  729. Ge0rG

    I'm working on higher priority things right now

  730. Ge0rG ,oO( I need to bind that to a hotkey )

  731. Guus

    SCAM can send you that on a coffee mug, I think.

  732. Zash

    Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

  733. lovetox has left

  734. Guus

    Pelican Brief flashbacks...

  735. alacer has joined

  736. oli has left

  737. oli has joined

  738. Alex has joined

  739. Lance has joined

  740. Wojtek has joined

  741. rtq3 has left

  742. alacer has left

  743. alacer has joined

  744. alacer has left

  745. alacer has joined

  746. arc has left

  747. arc has joined

  748. lovetox has joined

  749. sezuan has left

  750. oli has left

  751. oli has joined

  752. peter has left

  753. neshtaxmpp has left

  754. rtq3 has joined

  755. oli has left

  756. oli has joined

  757. marc_ has left

  758. marc_ has joined

  759. jcbrand has left

  760. Half-ShotX has joined

  761. Steve Kille has left

  762. jubalh has joined

  763. igoose has left

  764. igoose has joined

  765. Steve Kille has joined

  766. peter has joined

  767. alacer has left

  768. Ge0rG

    dwd: was the lack of a vote in your ATT mail by design or by accident?

  769. pep.

    In any case that was good feedback :)

  770. dwd

    Design. A veto seems like a last resort, I'd like to see what others say first.

  771. dwd

    But I am leaning toward a veto, as is probably obvious.

  772. jubalh has left

  773. lovetox

    why is it voting already

  774. lovetox

    it was my interpretation that after submitting something to the inbox the author can gather inital feedback and maybe improve the XEP

  775. ThibG has left

  776. ThibG has joined

  777. Half-ShotX has left

  778. lovetox

    ah but voting does not really change something

  779. lovetox

    the xep stays forever in inbox and can be improved

  780. goffi has left

  781. lskdjf has joined

  782. Ge0rG

    It's merely a vote on assigning a number.

  783. peter has left

  784. Ge0rG

    dwd: I'd also love to see your vote on 412.

  785. Steve Kille has left

  786. Ge0rG

    And somebody else would love to get all votes on DoX before the weekend.

  787. dwd

    lovetox, In general, if something's veto'd, people ditch it.

  788. dwd

    lovetox, Also, I have an enormous pet hate of people working on documents in Inbox, excepting addressing veto feedback. There's a huge IPR hole they then fall into.

  789. dwd

    lovetox, Unless/until we accept a XEP and give it a number, it's really not clear whose copyright and license it is.

  790. lovetox

    so the right approach would be to submit the xep to the list before submitting it to inbox

  791. peter has joined

  792. Steve Kille has joined

  793. lumi has left

  794. oli has left

  795. oli has joined

  796. jonas’

    Ge0rG, didn’t DoX expire this week?

  797. jonas’

    Ge0rG, yeah, DoX expired and with the last meeting’s votes it was accepted

  798. jonas’

    I’ll publish it, but not on April 1st

  799. jonas’

    I find it too misleading

  800. jonas’

    it is intended to be taken serious, but the nature of it makes it look like it might not be. I don’t want any confusion around that.

  801. Half-ShotX has joined

  802. moparisthebest

    why can't it be both? :)

  803. Zash

    March 31 at 23:59

  804. moparisthebest

    in my opinion, it has valid use-cases, but is also silly enough to be published on April 1st :)

  805. jonas’

    moparisthebest, simply to avoid confusion

  806. peter has left

  807. dele has left

  808. moparisthebest

    what's wrong with a little confusion

  809. Dele Olajide has joined

  810. Steve Kille has left

  811. Ge0rG


  812. kokonoe has left

  813. Ge0rG

    jonas’: please do on 1st

  814. kokonoe has joined

  815. Dele Olajide has left

  816. Dele Olajide has joined

  817. Half-ShotX has left

  818. Steve Kille has joined

  819. Half-ShotX has joined

  820. Wojtek has left

  821. Wojtek has joined

  822. Half-ShotX has left

  823. jonas’

    moparisthebest, people already complain enough about confusing things with our standards

  824. moparisthebest

    but what's confusing, it's a simple spec that has implementations, anyone that doesn't want it will ignore it, anyone that does might go "haha this was published on April 1st" but, what's the downside

  825. jonas’

    it’s "this was published on April 1st, is this serious, do people implement it, what?"

  826. moparisthebest

    that's fine, it's easily resolved, if it was published on April 2nd you still don't know if people implement it

  827. Half-ShotX has joined

  828. Half-ShotX has left

  829. Seve

    I don't like humorous XEPs, but in his defense this isn't

  830. moparisthebest

    it's a little humorous, we don't have a Type for that

  831. moparisthebest

    Type: Slightly Humorous Standards Track

  832. Zash

    Type: Art

  833. moparisthebest

    Type: Author thinks it's hilarious but everyone else disagrees Standards Track

  834. Dele Olajide has left

  835. Dele Olajide has joined

  836. david has left

  837. Half-ShotX has joined

  838. moparisthebest

    Ge0rG, since you in particular seemed to consider using this for real, did you see https://github.com/wiktor-k/prosody-dox

  839. Alex has left

  840. Seve

    > Type: Author thinks it's hilarious but everyone else disagrees Standards Track Accurate

  841. Alex has joined

  842. karoshi has left

  843. Half-ShotX has left

  844. Half-ShotX has joined

  845. valo has left

  846. rtq3 has left

  847. Half-ShotX has left

  848. lumi has joined

  849. valo has joined

  850. Lance has left

  851. Lance has joined

  852. Half-ShotX has joined

  853. Half-ShotX has left

  854. Half-ShotX has joined

  855. arc has left

  856. arc has joined

  857. Half-ShotX has left

  858. typikol has joined

  859. APach has left

  860. rtq3 has joined

  861. lorddavidiii has joined

  862. Half-ShotX has joined

  863. Half-ShotX has left

  864. Half-ShotX has joined

  865. Half-ShotX has left

  866. Lance has left

  867. typikol has left

  868. mimi89999 has left

  869. j.r has left

  870. j.r has joined

  871. mimi89999 has joined

  872. Syndace has left

  873. Half-ShotX has joined

  874. yvo has joined

  875. Half-ShotX has left

  876. Half-ShotX has joined

  877. peter has joined

  878. APach has joined

  879. peter has left

  880. Syndace has joined

  881. Half-ShotX has left

  882. APach has left

  883. arc has left

  884. arc has joined

  885. APach has joined

  886. Half-ShotX has joined

  887. debacle has left

  888. Half-ShotX has left

  889. Half-ShotX has joined

  890. Half-ShotX has left

  891. Half-ShotX has joined

  892. Dele Olajide has left

  893. Dele Olajide has joined

  894. Dele Olajide has left

  895. Half-ShotX has left

  896. oli has left

  897. Half-ShotX has joined

  898. Half-ShotX has left

  899. lorddavidiii has left

  900. lorddavidiii has joined

  901. Nekit has left

  902. goffi has joined

  903. Half-ShotX has joined

  904. G0s+ has left

  905. Half-ShotX has left

  906. Half-ShotX has joined

  907. Half-ShotX has left

  908. Nekit has joined

  909. kokonoe has left

  910. kokonoe has joined

  911. lorddavidiii has left

  912. Half-ShotX has joined

  913. Half-ShotX has left

  914. goffi has left

  915. david has joined

  916. Half-ShotX has joined

  917. Half-ShotX has left

  918. yvo has left

  919. larma has left

  920. lskdjf has left

  921. Half-ShotX has joined

  922. Half-ShotX has left

  923. Half-ShotX has joined

  924. Half-ShotX has left

  925. Half-ShotX has joined

  926. arc has left

  927. arc has joined

  928. larma has joined

  929. lskdjf has joined

  930. Half-ShotX has left

  931. Half-ShotX has joined

  932. zak has left

  933. oli has joined

  934. Nekit has left

  935. arc has left

  936. arc has joined

  937. Half-ShotX has left

  938. Half-ShotX has joined

  939. Half-ShotX has left

  940. Half-ShotX has joined

  941. Half-ShotX has left

  942. david has left

  943. david has joined

  944. lskdjf has left

  945. G0s+ has joined

  946. larma has left

  947. debacle has joined

  948. Half-ShotX has joined

  949. 404.city Support has joined

  950. 404.city has joined

  951. 404.city Support has left

  952. 404.city has left

  953. Half-ShotX has left

  954. blabla has left

  955. Half-ShotX has joined

  956. moparisthebest

    So 1 council member (and author) are for April 1st release, editor and council member (same person) is against, can we get more council members to weigh in? dwd Link Mauve Kev ?

  957. Half-ShotX has left

  958. karoshi has joined

  959. wurstsalat has left

  960. Half-ShotX has joined

  961. Half-ShotX has left

  962. Half-ShotX has joined

  963. Half-ShotX has left

  964. moparisthebest has left

  965. moparisthebest has joined

  966. Wojtek has left

  967. Half-ShotX has joined

  968. mikaela has left

  969. dwd

    Anything that suggests people shouldn't implement sounds good to me. ;-)

  970. Ge0rG

    dwd: so you are for April 1st as well... 😁

  971. moparisthebest

    Yay that's another council member for!

  972. Ge0rG

    Haven't seen kev yet

  973. dwd

    I don't think, strictly, that the date of publication is something I can actually vote for or against, however.

  974. Ge0rG

    dwd: you can kindly ask the editor to do his duty on a given date.

  975. UsL has left

  976. UsL has joined

  977. oli has left

  978. alacer has joined

  979. dwd

    FWIW, I've never been particularly in favour of the "Humorous" track. But then, I'm in favour of more subtle jokes.

  980. Half-ShotX has left

  981. Half-ShotX has joined

  982. moparisthebest


  983. Half-ShotX has left

  984. lnj has left

  985. moparisthebest

    Like a real spec with multiple independent implementations that is a bit silly and happens to be released on April 1st ?

  986. moparisthebest

    That's just good marketing

  987. Ge0rG

    I think that after we missed to assign the number 404 to a XEP that actually deserves it, we can have DoX on April 1st... @jonas’

  988. dwd

    Ge0rG, Hidden Jid support isn't bad.

  989. Ge0rG

    I tend to disagree

  990. alacer has left

  991. jubalh has joined

  992. neshtaxmpp has joined

  993. Half-ShotX has joined

  994. jubalh has left

  995. Half-ShotX has left

  996. Half-ShotX has joined

  997. Half-ShotX has left

  998. mimi89999 has left

  999. typikol has joined

  1000. typikol has left

  1001. Half-ShotX has joined

  1002. Half-ShotX has left

  1003. Half-ShotX has joined

  1004. larma has joined

  1005. lskdjf has joined

  1006. lovetox has left

  1007. Half-ShotX has left

  1008. Half-ShotX has joined

  1009. ThibG has left

  1010. ThibG has joined

  1011. Half-ShotX has left

  1012. Half-ShotX has joined

  1013. lskdjf has left

  1014. typikol has joined

  1015. Half-ShotX has left

  1016. Half-ShotX has joined