nyco_I can add a CC by-sa (latest) in each newsletter individually, at no cost
SeveI remember something happened and that PR had to wait for some reason, but can't remember why
nyco_there is no legal terms, nor any terms of service
GuusFrom what I read in the PR, Goffi wants the newsletter to explicitly state that it's CC By-SA licensed, so that its content can be translated shared on other sites.
MattJI see no problem with that in itself
GuusJC mentions that the entire website probably _should_ be under this license anyway
SeveWe may just be missing to add that on every newsletter and that would be it?
nyco_for the newsletter, on my side, no worry to make it CC by-sa explicity, for all starting from now, or individually
GuusGoffi mentions that it still is not, and by adding the license at least to the newsletter, the problem thta he's having would be fixed.
nyco_that's a micro issue, what about the macro ?
MattJWell, we can first add it to the newsletter, and then resolve the website
GuusIf we at one point had the website under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ and the license reference got lost during a website makeover, I have no issue in adding https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ to each newsletter.
MattJI think allowing distribution and translation of the newsletter is higher priority
Guus2.5 is what we had. I don't know what the differences are between 2.5 and 4.0
nyco_so it this PR obsolete now? in which case we can reject it
nyco_differences between 4.0 and 2.5 is 1.5 :)
nyco_you're welcome... :/
MattJGuus, what evidence do you have that 2.5 is what we had?
GuusJC's comment in https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/409#issuecomment-369945588
MattJRight, I was looking for more
Guuspulling up wayback machine now...
SeveLike an evidence? :D
MattJIn the interests of getting things moving, I motion that we publish the newsletter as cc-by-sa in future, and tackle the larger issue of the website separately
nyco_ok, all newsletters from now on are under latest CC by-sa
anybody against that?
nyco_+1 for that motion
MattJSeems like we're in agreement - Seve?
nyco_I raise the question: what version
nyco_I motion "the latest"
SeveJust thinking about if the XSF apart from the author could have the rights?
Sevebut I'm totally +1 with it
MattJ4.0 seems fine to me, unless someone has a reason to object
nyco_we are pointing to news, that we write, there will be some copy-pasting though, which is legally authorised
GuusI don't have a reason to object.
GuusCan't find a reference to an exact version in the wayback machine on short notice (it ... is .. slow).
nyco_no, not 4.0, but "latest", which means when a new version is published, we auto-upgrade
MattJnyco_, I'm not sure you can just do that
Guuslet's not auto-upgrade. We don't know what we're agreeing to, by doing that.
MattJor want to
nyco_I got lawyers in my coworking space, I'll confirm
nyco_then when a new version of the license is published, we raise the question again
nyco_or we can just trust the license issuer to be just more competent than we are
MattJOk, I'll respond to the PR with our feedback
Guusso we agreed to not auto-update?
Guus(for the minutes?)
SeveNo auto-upgrade, no
Link MauveHi, I’m here to answer any question you have about 1.2.
MattJGuus, the PR is for 4.0 on the newsletter, so I think that's what we will go with for now
MattJif anyone objects, shout, but I think that can be addressed separately
MattJDOAP PR is https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/409/files
MattJCopy/paste fail. DOAP PR is https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/594
GuusI'm having concerns
MattJTechnical or philosophical?
nyco_I have just asked my lawyers: you can publish content under "CC by-sa or later"
nyco_> Technical or philosophical?
can it be another option?
MattJnyco_, thanks for the info
Guus- DOAP as a protocol seems pretty new/unused - no updates in its git history for over a year. Is this the right tool to be used for this?
- Adding more details to software listing on the XSF website is a slippery slope, as discussed before.
- Asking for DOAP data would add hurdles for new projects to be listed - some projects already don't take the effort to do this simple listing - I don't want to make this more difficult.
MattJ1) doesn't concern me. I think the alternative is making up something of our own, which has zero tooling/etc. - DOAP is RDF, which has a bunch of existing tooling and projects around it
Link Mauve- DOAP is used at least by CPAN (Perl repository) and PyPI (Python repository), I expect other ones too, and there were minimal additions I had to add to support our usecase.
SeveDOAP data should be optional for new projects (or any projects) to be listed. The more you provide, the better. But that should not block
Link MauveAppStream might be another to look into.
nyco_DOAP could structure the community a lot, as well as contribute to SEO
MattJ2) I'm curious what the concrete problems are here. In the past discussions have been about how we can objectively verify someone's support for a certain protocol. Here they are self-reporting, and we just state that
MattJ3) it's optional, not a hurdle
Guus3) if some projects do it, your listing has to do it to 'keep up'
Link MauveFor your third point Guus, I expect DOAP to allow relaxing the renewal requirement, for instance if a project just got a new release in the past year we could automatically consider it as the most recent renewal and avoid the manual one.
MattJGuus, and I'm fine with that - I think it's a great thing for a project to have
GuusLink Mauve good point.
SeveGuus, that means more incentive for projects to become better
nyco_this specific DOAP format may seem overkill though
Link MauveThe exact rules are of course to be discussed.
MattJnyco_, I agree, but it can be automated
MattJand I don't see a better/simpler format than someone we just cook up ourselves
Link Mauvenyco_, the main reason I went for this format was that it was already used elsewhere, had existing parsers, and so that other people could use them for different purposes than what we originally thought about.
SeveIn this example you can see here: https://linkmauve.fr/extensions/xep-0048.xml
Where it says "Software support", I would appreciate a lot a link or a comment to a page explaining how this data/support info is obtained, so we state it is not crafted by us
nyco_Link Mauve : that's what I used "may"
Link MauveThis isn’t just about xmpp.org, but for any consumer to derive data from our list of XMPP software.
GuusSeve that link doesn't work for me.
nyco_Link Mauve : good point, that's why I mentioned SEO
GuusDo we want to apply this before the spec has been ironed out?
SeveGuus, maybe you can check my screenshot
GuusLink Mauve I got a 404 actually, but nevermind. Seve's screenshot is useful.
GuusI quite dislike that XEP example, by the way
nyco_that software support table is awesome
GuusI'd hate for discussions around 'why is my implementation not listed'
MattJ"because you didn't provide a DOAP file"
SeveBecause you didn't provide
Seveok MattJ, you win this time
SeveThat's why I'm saying we need that other page explaining this
Link MauveSeve, good point, we can add any such link once we have one written. :)
GuusI don't like how that almost forces people to use this at all.
nyco_I don't get that "force", please explain?
MattJGuus, it doesn't force, but obviously if they do this then they benefit
MattJand I really see no problem - why wouldn't you do it?
MattJIt's not like we're asking for money
SeveI have some other frontend/interface points to discuss, but maybe that should go into another conversation
GuusBy not complying, you're at a disadvantage.
MattJSo why not comply?
Link MauveGuus, the idea was to do it similarly to the w3c HTML5 pages, which for each section (for us each XEP I guess? At least for now) you can see which browsers support the feature.
MattJWhat are the barriers?
nyco_I share Guus' concerns about putting pressure on software projects owners, who are already struggling
MattJnyco_, this removes the annual renewal requirement already, so they can spend their time elsewhere
Link MauveWe may even create a web page where you can input your software data and it will generate a beautiful DOAP file for you to host on your website.
Guuswhy not comply: time/money and a spec that's not ironed out.
SeveTo me, that gives you more reasons to keep up with your project. I find it a bit "weird" to have a client but not a list of what do you support, etc
nyco_MattJ there is still non-code maintenance to be done
Seve We may even create a web page where you can input your software data and it will generate a beautiful DOAP file for you to host on your website.
Link MauveGuus, note that this PR doesn’t modify the XEP page at all atm.
Link MauveIt only adds the data to Pelican for further use.
Seve >We may even create a web page where you can input your software data and it will generate a beautiful DOAP file for you to host on your website.
Link Mauvemoparisthebest, this kind of website could perfectly use the DOAP data we will gather.
nyco_Link Mauve : agree a form can simplify people's lives
GuusLink Mauve true.
Link Mauvenyco_, I can add that as an actionable.
MattJI am strongly strongly in favour of this, and we can only make it better and easier over time
nyco_moparisthebest : and the shiny new https://www.caniemail.com
MattJI see absolutely no reason why any project would be barred from participating
SeveI feel the same excitement!
nyco_we need our own canixmpp.com
Link MauveThat was the reason I proposed this PR as early, so we can discuss it and figure out the points to be resolved before going full out with it. :)
nyco_yeah, looks like we can build so much with only the small adoption of a format
MattJThe meeting is over time. Do we want to vote on approving the PR in this meeting, or provide some actionable feedback on it?
nyco_looks like we have a consensus that DOAP can be cool
nyco_we have not agreed on the details and next steps yet
nyco_that's my feeling
SeveI would like to ask for some frontend tweaks if possible (in the sense of, if those can be done by somebody)
MattJSeve, there is no frontend yet (in this PR)
SeveAh, right hah :)
MattJThis is just some tooling to fetch the data
SeveI went too far
MattJand then more PRs can follow, which actually do something with it
Link MauveSeve, note that there is no frontend work in this PR, it only adds a "doap" entry for each software we have in our lists, and a simple Python parser for them.
GuusIf the question is only to add a link to software listing on our website (but I think that the PR also includes some kind of script?), I'd not object to just that.
Guuswhat does the parser do?
nyco_so let's continue that discussion on the next board meeting?
SeveI would be ok with voting for this PR
MattJYeah, I think we're going to have to call this one unfinished. I have another meeting to attend in a few.
Link MauveGuus, it parses a DOAP file and adds the data to Pelican’s internal structs, for further use.
MattJFeel free to continue discussion afterwards
Link MauveI could remove it from the PR if you want to only add the doap URLs.
MattJ2) Date of next
MattJbangs the gavel
GuusI need to run too.
SeveThank you everybody! thanks Link Mauve for being present, that helps a lot
Seveand Guus for the minutes, we love you!
Link MauveAnd to you all for running the board. :)
GuusYou should run next year!
Guussee: council and board elections! 🙂
Danieli think having the software list on xmpp.org list the compliance suite status is very helpful (and somewhat overdue) for users. it is fine to get your weekend project listed on their. but users need to be able to quickly figure out in what state a client is before clicking the link. and doap files seem to be a good way to figure that out automatically.
also the reverse thing (show which software supports a given XEP) is nice as well. especially for libraries. (the list should be less in your face and also collapsible; but that's details)
Link MauveThe design of the table in the XEP was edhelas’s work, kudos to him for that, but that’s a first attempt.
Link MauveWe obviously can improve on it. :)
Link MauveNow that Pelican has access to the status of the XEPs per client, we could automatically select the relevant compliance suite badge.
Link MauveThe website generator used for xmpp.org.
Danielyes that would be super helpful. i mean right now the user will have to click through each website to find something that is actually good
Danielit might also bring more visibility to the compliance suits themselves
Link Mauvesonny, you may be interested, ↑
sonnyLink Mauve, yes! I'm working on the proposal today and will send it to you
Link Mauvesonny, the whole DOAP thing might play well with it.
Link MauveSee the messages since 15:50:49.
Ge0rG> i think having the software list on xmpp.org list the compliance suite status is very helpful
Daniel: for that, a simple tuple of `"compliance-suite": 2019` and `"compliance-level": "advanced-im"` would be more than sufficient
Ge0rGDOAP is significant overkill for that matter. I see how it's useful, but I really would like to have the CS level in the software listing rather sooner than later
Ge0rGwhich was one of the points of the Badge.
Ge0rGLink Mauve: is there an elegant way to make use of implicit dependencies in DOAP? i.e. I don't actually do anything with RSM, except for applying it in MAM
Ge0rGOr: I'm using 0049 only for Bookmarks
DanielIt might not be worth listing at all?
Ge0rGjust realized that CS-2020 is missing one of the most important XEPs, ever. XEP-0245
Link MauveGe0rG, DOAP is purely descriptive, it would be up to consumer scripts to derive data from it.
Link MauveAlso for user-facing lists I expect we wouldn’t show 0059 or 0049 at all, instead display Feature: Bookmarks.
Link Mauve“we” being any random consumer script.
Link MauveGe0rG, !
Ge0rGLink Mauve: so I need to enter all the dependencies manually, explicitly?
Link MauveIf you want to advertise them, I’d say yes.
Ge0rGLink Mauve: is there a mid-term URL for the style.xsl that I can use on the RDF file checked into my git?
Link MauveGe0rG, I have it at https://linkmauve.fr/extensions/style.xsl (just updated it), but I’m not sure about CORS things.
Link MauveDo you even need CORS with XSLT?
Ge0rG> Unsafe attempt to load URL https://linkmauve.fr/extensions/style.xsl from frame with URL https://op-co.de/tmp/yaxim.rdf.xml. Domains, protocols and ports must match.
Ge0rGLink Mauve: so how can I commit it to source control and have it renderable?
Link MauveGe0rG, use xslt-proc as part of your website’s build system?
Link MauveOr rely on the browsers’ XSLT processors by making sure you serve it with the correct MIME type.
Link MauveOr rely on the browsers’ XSLT processors by making sure you serve it with the correct Content-Type.
Ge0rGI'm building my website from a different repository.
Ge0rGLink Mauve: so how's this for now? https://yaxim.org/doap/yaxim.rdf.xml
Ge0rGAlso why is 0030 even versioned 2.5rc3?
Link MauveGe0rG, I’m not aware of short-name in DOAP, and neither is the DOAP owl.
Ge0rG~blames~ thanks wurstsalat
Link MauveIf you want to invent new properties you have to do them in a different namespace.
Ge0rGso should name be the long name or just "yaxim" then?
Link MauveJust yaxim I think.
Link MauveAs an implementation detail of the xmpp.org Pelican integration I started, it should match the name used on xmpp.org.
Ge0rGah well, it will be fun with Bruno the Jabber™ Bear
Ge0rGLink Mauve: that list has many supplementary XEPs now, no idea which ones to kick out.
Link MauveGe0rG, otherwise it looks good. :)
Ge0rGLink Mauve: awesome!
Ge0rGLink Mauve: why is the xsl referencing ../style.css btw?
Ge0rGit makes self-hosting moar complicated
Link MauveI think because PulkoMandy has a the sample DOAP files in a directory, with the XSLT and CSS in the parent.
Ge0rGah well. I won't ever touch that again, anyway.
Ge0rGIs there a more elegant way to make the DOAP apply for Bruno as well as for yaxim, than `cp yaxim.rdf bruno.rdf`?
Link Mauveln -s?
Link MauveAlso no, you’ll have to change the name probably.
Ge0rGLink Mauve: how am I supposed to change name and desc... yeah
Ge0rGcp is more elegant than cp?
pep.Template it somehow?
MattJYeah, I think automating it is the way
Link MauveZash, that’s UUOC. :p
MattJRe-posting my in-progress MAM diff: https://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/stdin-s2ilB8Kj
MattJlovetox and jonas’ ^ hopefully it addresses some of the issues you have asked about
Zash> and also implement , and clients that depend on these fields MUST verify [...]
ZashBug in the thing or in the text?
MattJI think the text, but looks like I already fixed it
Ge0rGMattJ: will you also handle my preferences-as-a-tristate remark from standards@?
ZashTristate? Which email?
MattJGe0rG, preferences have been removed :)
MattJ(they will be submitted as a separate XEP)
DanielMattJ, so assuming i use after-id and I want the second page? will i just make a new request with a new after-id or do i RSM?
MattJDaniel, it's confusing because there is overlap, but RSM seems to not be enough
Ge0rGZash: (c) from https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-November/033762.html
MattJDaniel, so I would imagine before-id/after-id should be used for filtering, and RSM only for paging (as it was designed)
Steve Killehas left
MattJand I just need to figure out if/what text should be added about that
Ge0rGIt's great to dig out years-old mails that nobody responded to.
ZashGe0rG: We added that to Prosody at least, right?
DanielMattJ, so to answer the question on the second page i'd be using RSM?
Ge0rGMattJ: I suppose that you'll add preferences into a separate XEP, then. That would be a great opportunity to sneak it in.
Ge0rGZash: please read all of it.
MattJDaniel, yes, at which point if you only have after-id in the query and are using <after> in RSM, you could drop after-id with no change in the results you see
MattJBut that wouldn't be necessary
Danielright. and/or I would be in the slightly confusing situation where i have an after-id and a rsm after that are different?
MattJIf you find it confusing, just specify one or the other
MattJOne selects the query range, one selects the page
MattJBut you could change the range to begin at the start of the page you want to request, and you'll get the same results
Danielright. so 'count' is not the full archive
Steve Killehas joined
MattJI suspect this will be quite a pain to implement on the server side, fwiw, need to investigate that
MattJBut the goal is to solve real problems that people are having with MAM (as clients), so I want to make sure these changes solve those problems before going much further
Danieli always thought it was supposed to fix server side issues?
DanielMattJ: are you going to write a security section and/or other words regarding the client having to match the query ID with running queries and verify the sender ID? If not I could maybe volunteer to do that
Danielmost clients seem to be fine with just abusing RSM for that
MattJI can include that, yeah
MattJMade a note
MattJI think abusing RSM is fine in general, and I'm not even sure it's abuse... if you look at the archive as a stream of messages and the client wants successive pages
MattJIt just gets messed up in corner cases, such as where people want to fill a hole in the past
Danielah. because you can’t have both
MattJAlso, <before> in RSM has a slightly different meaning
MattJ<before> in RSM means you want the page before the id you provide
MattJbefore-id doesn't select the page, you'll still get the oldest page first
MattJThis probably needs some extra clarification in the doc also
Ge0rGMattJ: you should also have a section on "Order of events", for clients that desire a mostly-historically-linear access to the log
MattJRough description of what it would contain?
Ge0rGi.e. fetch MAM before enabling carbons / sending presence-available, then immediately close the gap :>
MattJThat's originally what this section was: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html#sync
MattJa nice how-to for clients
MattJand then it just didn't work, because of the race
Ge0rGand then Bind2 never happened
MattJso I documented the race problem and postponed the how-to for a brighter day, when it was fixed
MattJso I'd like to make bind2 happen
MattJor bind-not-2, whatever it takes to get something done
MattJbecause it's pretty easy to fix this
Ge0rGjust gimme MAM-sub: an atomic switchover from MAM to live traffic, given on a date/id passed by the client; auto-enabling of "sent" carbons, delivery of all received messages, similar to the Carbon rules but with no forwarded wrapper, immediate acking with mam-id of outgoing messages
Ge0rGah, yeah. wiping of all MAMed messages from offline, delivery of the remaining offline messages
Ge0rGMattJ: this will solve all MAM problems, except for MUC-PMs
Ge0rGand it's sufficiently easy to make me wonder why it's not there yet ;)
Danielall MAM problems?
Ge0rGDaniel: that was a slight exaggeration.
Ge0rGIt will only solve the problems I'm bitching about for two years.
Danieli've been using. gather last_id; enable_carbons, send presence, fire mam query for years w/o any known issues
Danielsure a "get mam-id for sent messages" would be nice
Daniel(i also feel like we've talked about that a week ago)
Ge0rGDaniel: yes, it works, at the cost of client side deduplication
Danielwhat are you going to dedup?
Steve Killehas left
Ge0rGOffline, online and MAM results
Ge0rGAlso my database schema requires messages to arrive roughly in chronological order.
Danielwell yes you need dedup but online + mam result will rarly happen
Steve Killehas joined
Ge0rGRarely is not never
Ge0rGMobile connections may be very slow, especially in Germany
Danielsure. like i said you'll need dedup. but traffic wise or what ever you are concerned about it's not an issue
Danieli mean you are getting like 1 duplicate message or what? who cares
MattJDaniel: your XMPP client will never succeed while you have that attitude
MattJEveryone knows success depends on a perfect protocol first
Ge0rGThere is actually one other issue with synchronizing MAM. How do I decide whether to ring the phone notification sound or not?
Danielwait until catchup is complete. crossrefenece with messages received from your other instances. take chat markers into account. and then bleep once if there are messages in the new queue
Ge0rGDaniel: regardless of whether it's a fresh sync or just a reconnect after 10mins of lack of coverage?
Danieli mean depends on what a fresh sync is to you
Ge0rGI just installed the client
Danielare you downloading the entire MAM?
Danieli use what i described in catchup situations. first install isn’t catchup
Ge0rGThe current beta is downloading 31 days, I'll probably limit it to 7 or so.
lovetoxGreat MattJ that will certainly help to fill holes
lovetoxi just wonder is the field request not enough to detect fields
lovetoxdo we need another feature?
lovetoxsure its one less roundtrip
lovetoxbut are we going to add extended2, extended3 now for every field we add to mam?
lovetoxthough if i look at pubsub i guess thats not a problem
> Version 2.5_rc3_
What's up with an rc version?
ZashFor 2 years?
pep.Let's all show openssl how much we care about them adding SRVName and xmppAddr support to `openssl x509`: