rionaccording to "Council Minutes" emails it seems it's hardly possible xsf will accept any significnt changes to jingle s5b. So I think what if I propose another s5b based protocol under different namespace, will it have better chances to be accepted?
jonas’that’d probably fall under duplication
rionthen probably I have to hurry up with sctp+dtls transport implementation while it's still "Deferred"
jonas’rion, to be clear, I don’t like this situation at all myself
jonas’I’m not sure what to do about it though
jonas’The list is often rather silent on Jingle-related issues, presumably because of its complexity. So there are a few choices: (1) council trusts the submitters of patches and allows them through, assuming that those who patch jingle are those who are most familiar with it because they implement it; (2) we replace jingle by something simpler, causing yet another rift in the ecosystem; (3) we stall jingle until we find some trusted reviewers for the patches or a similar mechanism.
jonas’currently we seem to be kind of passively ending up in situation (3)
Danieljonas’: I've observed the same pattern with any of the more complex / less implemented xeps
DanielMore in-depth questions for example regarding pubsub seemingly hit the same wall of silance
jonas’and I find pubsub not even *that* complex
rionfippo had some review of my change. at least I trust him and I think others too :)
According to him there is another way with different pros/cons and he implemented it in some client.
jonas’rion, until last week, I didn’t even know who "fippo" is :)
jonas’so it’s not as easy and clear cut sometimes
DanielWe should probably block a lot of those until we have more (open source) experience with them. For example once the last call for message init it out I will suggest to hold it. I'm planning an implementation for later this year and based on the fact that my implementation will only be the second one that's a good reason to gain some more experience with it imho
jonas’jingle message initiation
jonas’a non-iq flow to initiate jingle sessions
Ge0rGIMHO, the XSF Council should be, in theory, knowledgeable in all aspects of XMPP. However, with over 400 XEPs, this is simply not feasible. So I think that (3) is the most viable way forward, and for Jingle we should maybe have three volunteers with sufficient experience to chime in
rionah. I'm going to implement it too but not sure how soon
jonas’I wonder whether we should use Last Call to find folks who are knowledgeable in the spec and not advance it unless there are any
jonas’but that of course does not help with the typical human churn in ecosystems
Danieljonas’: isn't that literally the point of last call
jonas’Daniel, no, the last call is for feedback (in my understanding)
jonas’not for writing down the names of the poor souls who *provided* feedback as victims for future review requests :)
Danieli mean it's almost funny. with simple xeps like http upload you got tons of bike shedding which prevents it from going through call because everyone seems to have an opinion. and the complex xeps 'nobody' understands just go through
Ge0rGyeah, that's rather sad.
jonas’that’s the specific definition of bike shedding, isn’t it?
fippothe situation wasn't much different for RFC 6120...
fippomessage init has been implemented and from what i discussed with lance it was with mam enabled even
fippoand the case that was raised on list (need to reply...) seemed unlikely unless you consider cases like hunt groups where multiple people use the same account
Ge0rGfippo: I'm very much interested in the interaction of message init (actually all non-directly-IM use cases of messages) with MAM and Carbons
Ge0rGespecially under the new Carbon rules which are apparently widely ignored.
fippoge0rg: its a bigger topic, yeah. it was originally designed to interact well with both ("did i have a call from that person" - mam; "i took the call on the other device" - carbons)
ralphmAt VEON we used dedicated messages for the latter. We called them CDRs, although I'm not sure if that was the right call (haha).
ralphmWe didn't get to submit a proper XEP on it, but I probably should.
Ge0rG> I probably should
This happens everywhere in the XSF, doesn't it? :)
ralphmGe0rG: a company shutting down your project and development team tends to change its one's priorities.
ralphmGe0rG: a company shutting down your project and development team tends to change one's priorities.
Ge0rGralphm: not trying to criticize you, it's just a general sentiment
fipporalphm: i never dared to call anything CDR inside a telco :-)
dwdfippo, I called things CDRs, but only because they were.
dwdGe0rG, It's nice when the Council has members with direct knowledge and experience of a subject area. Where we don't, I hope people at least know someone they trust and can ask for a review. That's certainly how I work - I don't claim any serious understanding of VOIP, for example, but I'm pretty confident that fippo knows a thing or two.
ralphmI read most messages by fippo and it made sense, but I didn't respond. Should I do more "I agree" messages?
Ge0rGdwd: that's a great way to work indeed. But maybe we can formalize that out just a little bit, with "trusted people" being loosely defined for certain topics like Jingle, and "ask for a review" happening on-list?
dwdGe0rG, I think if we wanted to formalize it, I'd say we should form a SIG and/or Work Team for it and formalize it that way.
dwdralphm, Yes. Speaking personally, a whole bunch of "I agree", and "Me too", is very useful for me to gauge consensus on things.
ZashSilence is agreement!
dwdZash, It's not though. It's just silence. And if we choose to interpret silence in a particular way, it becomes quite complex to judge almost anything.
dwdZash, IoW, All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
jonas’especially on topics I’m not familiar with, I don’t know if silence is due to other people also not being familiar, or whether there’s truly a horde of folks who know things and simply agree in silence
Zashs/for .*/negative parlamentarism/ ? :)
ralphmOk, I'll speak up more.
jonas’we need simple mailing list reactions :)
Zash`Content-Type: human/reaction; charset=utf-8`
Ge0rGralphm: that'd be great
fippoa jingle directorate? but remember, its already hard work to get people to review stuff
dwdjonas’, I sometimes wonder if we shouldn't switch to thumbs up/thumbs down/comments on PRs as the feedback of record.
jonas’but that would be fully moving to GitHub
jonas’but only for PRs
dwdjonas’, Move off mailing lists totally, and maybe see about integrating chatroom archive fragments into PRs.
jonas’which is kind of meh, because there’s then no single source of truth for technical discussion
dwdjonas’, Well, PRs and issues.
jonas’I’m not fond of that
ZashI do not approve
dwdjonas’, I'm not wild about the idea either. But I wonder whether mailing lists are really the most appropriate thing these days.
jonas’haven’t seen anything else with that fine-grained multi-device synchronising read marker support.
Ge0rGdwd: essentially anyone can +1 or -1 on github, and sometimes PRs go viral and get thousands of useless votes
dwdGe0rG, For sure.
dwdGe0rG, Any alternative I could suggest to mailing lists would get the same push-back, of course.
Danielmaybe github allows us to limit that to members
dwdGe0rG, My question is not, therefore, "Is X a perfect solution?" but "Is X better for us than mailing lists?"
jonas’one thing which mailing lists give me which nothing else has been able to so far is what I mentioned above: I can read parts of a thread, mark them as read when I not only read/looked at it, but also understood it, and have that state synchronised across my clients.
dwdGe0rG, And, of course, discussing such things on a mailing list are a recipe for survivorship bias of sorts.
jonas’which is vital for how I work
jonas’no web-based system has had that yet.
dwdjonas’, Yes, I can understand that.
Ge0rGdwd: right. I tend to side with jonas’ here though. While ugly, I think that establishing a sort of +1 one-liner comment on-list from competent participants would be good
jonas’it’d break my ability to participate.
dwdGe0rG, By the way, if we had an XSF PR that garnered thousands of votes, it'd be a problem I'd love to have.
Ge0rGit appears to me that the Matrix has a very active and vocal marketing department, leading to a percetion of it being the only federated chat system out there.
Danielthey also had the genius and very unique idea to create bridges to other IM networks
jonas’very genious, very unique
Ge0rGI'm sure we all know what we have to do. And we lack the time to.