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 Heh
  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’ :D
  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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-mls-mls-federation-00
  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 :D
  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 agreed.
  273. dwd I'm also a big fan of "I've implemented this and it works".
  274. MattJ Right
  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 https://docs.modernxmpp.org/client/protocol/#communicating-the-url
  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 Lol
  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’ maybe
  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 Ha
  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 3?
  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 Afk
  521. Seve MattJ, feels like it's just you and me
  522. dwd Your friendly ex-officio COuncil Chair is here too.
  523. nyco _o/
  524. Ge0rG that Council Chair could do their voting duty as well :D
  525. dwd Ge0rG, Yeah.
  526. MattJ Hey
  527. ralphm bangs gavel
  528. ralphm 0. Welcome + agenda
  529. ralphm Who? What?
  530. MattJ Me
  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 just*
  536. Dele Olajide has left
  537. Alex has joined
  538. dele has joined
  539. ralphm Ok.
  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 dwd?
  544. dwd I will, sadly, be disappearing into a meeting shortly, sorry.
  545. ralphm :-(
  546. ralphm Anyone?
  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 MattJ?
  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 how
  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 +1
  632. Guus Can we preemptively tell Tigase that they can use it?
  633. MattJ Seems fine to me
  634. ralphm Yes
  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 +6D23H
  650. MattJ :)
  651. Guus wfm
  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 :-D
  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 diapers.
  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 Yay!
  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 Exactly
  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