XSF Discussion - 2019-11-14

  1. alameyo has joined

  2. kokonoe has left

  3. kokonoe has joined

  4. stpeter has joined

  5. goffi has left

  6. kokonoe has left

  7. kokonoe has joined

  8. kokonoe has left

  9. pdurbin has joined

  10. debacle has left

  11. kokonoe has joined

  12. kokonoe has left

  13. kokonoe has joined

  14. kokonoe has left

  15. UṣL has left

  16. pdurbin has left

  17. stpeter has left

  18. patrick has left

  19. kokonoe has joined

  20. adiaholic has joined

  21. karoshi has left

  22. stpeter has joined

  23. mukt2 has joined

  24. DebXWoody has left

  25. DebXWoody has joined

  26. adiaholic has left

  27. stpeter has left

  28. mukt2 has left

  29. kokonoe has left

  30. adiaholic has joined

  31. stpeter has joined

  32. alexis has left

  33. alexis has joined

  34. mukt2 has joined

  35. Chobbes has joined

  36. kokonoe has joined

  37. rion has left

  38. kokonoe has left

  39. kokonoe has joined

  40. david has left

  41. david has joined

  42. DebXWoody has left

  43. DebXWoody has joined

  44. kokonoe has left

  45. kokonoe has joined

  46. pdurbin has joined

  47. adiaholic has left

  48. stpeter has left

  49. kokonoe has left

  50. kokonoe has joined

  51. DebXWoody has left

  52. DebXWoody has joined

  53. stpeter has joined

  54. neshtaxmpp has left

  55. neshtaxmpp has joined

  56. kokonoe has left

  57. kokonoe has joined

  58. neshtaxmpp has left

  59. neshtaxmpp has joined

  60. adiaholic has joined

  61. pdurbin has left

  62. pdurbin has joined

  63. vanitasvitae has left

  64. strypey has joined

  65. DebXWoody has left

  66. mukt2 has left

  67. vanitasvitae has joined

  68. kokonoe has left

  69. DebXWoody has joined

  70. mukt2 has joined

  71. Yagiza has joined

  72. mukt2 has left

  73. Zash has left

  74. strypey has left

  75. Nekit has joined

  76. kokonoe has joined

  77. kokonoe has left

  78. kokonoe has joined

  79. kokonoe has left

  80. Chobbes has left

  81. mukt2 has joined

  82. stpeter has left

  83. kokonoe has joined

  84. pdurbin has left

  85. mukt2 has left

  86. lorddavidiii has joined

  87. kokonoe has left

  88. mukt2 has joined

  89. Kev has left

  90. waqas has joined

  91. mukt2 has left

  92. kokonoe has joined

  93. mukt2 has joined

  94. mukt2 has left

  95. mukt2 has joined

  96. alexis has left

  97. mukt2 has left

  98. alexis has joined

  99. DebXWoody has left

  100. DebXWoody has joined

  101. LNJ has joined

  102. wurstsalat has joined

  103. j.r has left

  104. lorddavidiii has left

  105. neshtaxmpp has left

  106. lorddavidiii has joined

  107. waqas has left

  108. pdurbin has joined

  109. j.r has joined

  110. LNJ has left

  111. lorddavidiii has left

  112. lorddavidiii has joined

  113. pdurbin has left

  114. lorddavidiii has left

  115. lorddavidiii has joined

  116. aj has left

  117. lorddavidiii has left

  118. lorddavidiii has joined

  119. nyco

    Neustradamus please give full access to ralphm at least

  120. karoshi has joined

  121. sonny has left

  122. sonny has joined

  123. mathijs has left

  124. mathijs has joined

  125. Zash has joined

  126. winfried has left

  127. winfried has joined

  128. UṣL has joined

  129. Yagiza has left

  130. arc has left

  131. arc has joined

  132. Yagiza has joined

  133. winfried has left

  134. winfried has joined

  135. nyco

    there, I tried it, we'll see what happens: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6600654130799304704

  136. mathijs has left

  137. mathijs has joined

  138. winfried has left

  139. winfried has joined

  140. Steve Kille has left

  141. arc has left

  142. arc has joined

  143. arc has left

  144. arc has joined

  145. mathijs has left

  146. mathijs has joined

  147. Steve Kille has joined

  148. lorddavidiii has left

  149. Ge0rG

    That's not visible without submitting to LinkedIn

  150. lorddavidiii has joined

  151. nyco

    submit what?

  152. nyco

    you mean that's another Walled Garden? yes, it is... but the people we want to reach out to are there

  153. jonas’

    nyco, submit yourself

  154. nyco


  155. Ge0rG

    I once got a contact invitation from a person I was very interested in a business contact with. After registering on LI and actually talking to them it turned out that we both fell for LI dark patterns

  156. Maranda has left

  157. Maranda has joined

  158. Ge0rG

    Most of the people who "are there" aren't there by active choice but because they were tricked into it. Just saying. No action required.

  159. jubalh has joined

  160. !XSF_Martin

    Ge0rG: LI is like an international xing?

  161. Ge0rG

    !XSF_Martin: yes, but less ethical.

  162. !XSF_Martin

    Xing is ethical?

  163. Ge0rG

    !XSF_Martin: that's not what I said

  164. !XSF_Martin

    If it is more ethical than something else means it's not not ethical. 😃

  165. winfried has left

  166. Seve

    I thought Xing was "eatn" by LinkedIn

  167. winfried has joined

  168. !XSF_Martin

    Dunno, didn't log in in years I guess.

  169. !XSF_Martin

    Now I want to hear 'eaten' 'my one desire my only wish is to be EAATEEEEN'

  170. Seve

    I thought Xing was "eaten" by LinkedIn

  171. Ge0rG

    !XSF_Martin: your conclusion is wrong. Even among two unethical entities, one can be less ethical than the other.

  172. jonas’

    -10000 < -1000 is true, not just -10000 < 2

  173. Ge0rG

    It's not a binary property, unless you are part of a fundamental religious group (which is unethical in its own ways)

  174. Dele (Mobile) has joined

  175. ralphm

    If you mean that ethics are fluid and subjective, sure.

  176. adiaholic has left

  177. !XSF_Martin

    Ge0rG, jonas’: Than I would rather say xing is less unethical than li if both are negative. 😃

  178. Ge0rG

    !XSF_Martin: which would mean that xing is better, whereas what I said means that LI is worse.

  179. APach has left

  180. Kev has joined

  181. nyco


  182. jonas’

    Ge0rG, "even less ethical" would’ve worked to convey that

  183. Ge0rG

    jonas’: thanks, didn't think of that

  184. !XSF_Martin

    jonas’: That's the best way to express this I think. 😃

  185. adiaholic has joined

  186. adiaholic has left

  187. adiaholic has joined

  188. winfried has left

  189. winfried has joined

  190. lorddavidiii has left

  191. winfried has left

  192. winfried has joined

  193. lorddavidiii has joined

  194. LNJ has joined

  195. larma has joined

  196. kokonoe has left

  197. adiaholic has left

  198. pdurbin has joined

  199. nyco

    FYI: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Social_Media

  200. adiaholic has joined

  201. kokonoe has joined

  202. debacle has joined

  203. pdurbin has left

  204. adiaholic has left

  205. rion has joined

  206. winfried has left

  207. winfried has joined

  208. Holger

    How would clients using multi-item PEP nodes (such as for Bookmarks 2) handle the case where the number of bookmarks exceeds the max pubsub#max_items value the server accepts? "Dear user, you can't add this room without ditching another?"

  209. pep.

    badly, for sure

  210. pep.

    But then you're asking for infinite storage? (if it's not for bookmarks2 it'll be for something else)

  211. pep.

    Think pubsub nodes in movim/sàt (communities)

  212. kokonoe has left

  213. pep.

    edhelas, goffi ^ (how) do you handle that?

  214. Ge0rG

    Holger: the server should refuse adding new items in such a case, with a proper error, and clients should display that to the user

  215. Holger

    I would've thought this is not just an academic issue as many (non-recent?) servers won't accept pubsub#max_items > 1 or > 10 or so. Movim/Sàt always required servers with good PubSub support, clients joining rooms didn't.

  216. Holger

    Ge0rG: Awesome UX.

  217. pep.

    Holger, anybody can use a movim instance.. I can join with my crappy server config and still be able to post something on microblog :P

  218. pep.

    Also https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2019-October/036503.html

  219. Holger

    pep.: I forgot whether

  220. Ge0rG

    Holger: not sure if sarcastic

  221. Holger

    pep.: I forgot whether Movim uses PEP nodes (at least for comments), where the limits are often way more restrictive.

  222. pep.

    Holger, it depends on the user's account

  223. pep.

    For communities it depends on the pubsub server that's being used?

  224. Holger

    Ge0rG: I'm just unsure whether the advantages of Bookmarks 2 really outweigh this downside right now. But I get how multi-item PEP is the new hot thing, and I get how it's nicer in theory.

  225. Ge0rG

    Holger: yes

  226. adiaholic has joined

  227. kokonoe has joined

  228. sonny has left

  229. kokonoe has left

  230. kokonoe has joined

  231. Nekit has left

  232. Nekit has joined

  233. Nekit has left

  234. kokonoe has left

  235. sonny has joined

  236. Nekit has joined

  237. mathijs has left

  238. mathijs has joined

  239. Wojtek has joined

  240. mathijs has left

  241. mathijs has joined

  242. kokonoe has joined

  243. Link Mauve

    Holger, I would expect clients to not use bookmarks 2 before servers expose the urn:xmpp:bookmarks:0#compat disco#info feature.

  244. Link Mauve

    And servers with a limit of ten bookmarks shouldn’t advertise this feature.

  245. Link Mauve

    Prosody’s current limit is 255 items, which does feel low (I’m at 100+ already) but should be usable for most people.

  246. kokonoe has left

  247. kokonoe has joined

  248. Daniel has left

  249. pep.

    What Holger asks though doesn't just apply to bookmarks2

  250. pdurbin has joined

  251. pep.

    People only using XMPP as chat are just now starting to realize it's an issue but it has always been there

  252. Daniel has joined

  253. larma has left

  254. Shell has joined

  255. pdurbin has left

  256. Neustradamus

    Any news for an XMPP planet and that I have requested since several years ago?

  257. pep.

    Any news about Linkedin?

  258. ralphm

    scroll up

  259. Seve

    What is the request? Change the name?

  260. Link Mauve

    Yes, I remember ten years ago when I was working on a blogging engine and had to write my own PubSub component because Ejabberd’s didn’t provide me the features I needed.

  261. Neustradamus

    pep.: If you follow here, you have seen ;)

  262. pep.

    wow, stuff happened

  263. adiaholic has left

  264. adiaholic has joined

  265. alexis has left

  266. alexis has joined

  267. Neustradamus

    January 1999: Jabber is born October 2004: Jabber has been renamed to XMPP: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3920 October 2006: Jabber Enhancement Proposals (JEPs) -> XMPP Extension Protocols (XEPs) January 2007: Jabber Software Foundation -> XMPP Standards Foundation Now, maybe after several years of battle, planet.jabber.org will be move to planet.xmpp.org?

  268. larma has joined

  269. MattJ

    and jabber.org... what should happen to that?

  270. Ge0rG

    CNAME it to matrix.org

  271. Seve

    jabber.org is not XSF, isn't it

  272. Zash

    Nor is planet.jabber.org

  273. MattJ

    Correct (to both)

  274. Seve

    Then Neustradamus the request would be to ask the XSF to have its own planet

  275. MattJ

    which duplicates one that already exists, so I'm guessing the XSF will decide not to :)

  276. Maranda

    Planet X?

  277. Maranda

    There's one already!

  278. Zash

    Does it help facilitate discussion or manage XEP development? If not, hard to see how it should be run by the XSF.

  279. Alex has left

  280. Seve

    Weeell, that could be debatable, but I see your point.

  281. Daniel has left

  282. Ge0rG

    There is a difference between jabber and xmpp that nobody wants to acknowledge

  283. Zash

    Who's this 'nobody'?

  284. pep.

    Jabber is the company name that was sold to Cisco, and XMPP is the protocol name? :p

  285. fippo

    zash: that is unclear but he shot jack beauregard

  286. Seve

    Ge0rG, enlighten us

  287. Ge0rG

    Seve: jabber is the federated IM network based on the XMPP protocol. Also a Cisco trademark

  288. Zash

    Something something "jabber" more community than the protocol

  289. pep.

    I'd limit Jabber to Jabber Inc. fwiw, and the XMPP protocol. The rest is just confusion to me

  290. pep.

    I'd limit Jabber to Jabber Inc. fwiw, and XMPP to the protocol. The rest is just confusion to me

  291. Ge0rG

    pep.: because you are not part of the huge jabber user base, which mainly happens on other continents

  292. Daniel has joined

  293. pep.

    not sure I understand

  294. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, even in France there are a lot of Jabber users.

  295. Link Mauve

    People who will look at you as if you spoke Greek to them if you tell them about XMPP.

  296. ralphm

    There's no battle over Planet Jabber, by the way. Just a difference of opinion, Neustradamus.

  297. Chobbes has joined

  298. Ge0rG

    pep.: play a bit with https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=xmpp,jabber

  299. pep.

    Ge0rG, yes, confusion :P

  300. nyco

    Ge0rG the problem is "jabber" is a common language term

  301. pep.

    People saying Jabber when they're actually using XMPP

  302. Ge0rG

    pep.: in Russia for example, almost nobody knows "xmpp" but many tech people know "jabber"

  303. Ge0rG

    pep.: you "are using xmpp" when you develop an IoT middleware. You "are using jabber" when you do XMPP-federated IM

  304. MattJ

    I've had the "Oh! You mean Jabber" response multiple times

  305. nyco

    there is confusion indeed, that's why I often use both, as "Jabber/XMPP" or "XMPP/Jabber", and afaik it kind of works

  306. pep.

    MattJ, I have too. That doesn't mean..

  307. MattJ

    from a range of different people

  308. Seve

    Jabber? that old thing for chat?

  309. Seve

    Is what people tell me

  310. pep.

    That ^

  311. MattJ

    pep., trying to define these words in this chatroom is like writing a dictionary that doesn't reflect real world language

  312. Ge0rG

    Speaking of hosting. Our MLs are hosted on mail.jabber.org, is that wrong as well?

  313. MattJ

    Many people still actively use Jabber, and yes, as far as they are concerned it is a 20 year-old thing (but still functional)

  314. alameyo has left

  315. alameyo has joined

  316. MattJ

    and generally Pidgin is the best way to connect to it, in my experience

  317. pep.

    MattJ, sure it's not what I'm saying

  318. Ge0rG

    pep.: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/2017-July/008586.html didn't went very far, unfortunately

  319. Ge0rG

    Luckily, this is all off-topic for the XSF, and there is no other organization tasked with making XMPP-based IM more popular.

  320. Ge0rG

    So the whole discussion is moot.

  321. Ge0rG

    Unless, you know, somebody founds a Jabber Software Foundation and gets appropirate permits from the XSF.

  322. pep.

    that's just a can of worms

  323. pep.

    With Jabber in the name

  324. MattJ


  325. MattJ

    I'd love to revive Jabber as an end-user term, but I don't think it can happen

  326. Ge0rG

    Or funds a giant marketing campaign to let everybody and their aunt know that XMPP-based IM is now known as Xubber.

  327. DebXWoody

    When I'm talking with technical persons, I prefer to use XMPP. If I talk with "normal" users, I prefer to use jabber, because I have the feeling it is easier from them.

  328. pep.

    Ge0rG, I'd vote for that rather (name TBD)

  329. Ge0rG

    DebXWoody: it's also easier to pronounce

  330. nyco

    for me: XMPP is to Jabber what HTTP+HTML+JS+CSS is to the web

  331. Ge0rG

    pep.: I said "fund", not "vote"

  332. Ge0rG

    reality is, most users of xmpp IM actually know it as "jabber"

  333. pep.

    And jabber has all that bagage that I'm not ready to take on (esp. Cisco)

  334. Ge0rG

    we can face that reality and do the best we can with the trademark rights we have, or abandon all the brand value

  335. pep.

    Everytime somebody pronounces jabber that's one more coin for the trademark jar

  336. Ge0rG

    pep.: you can buy a license once you've got 500 coins together.

  337. pep.

    Or the free advertizing for Cisco. However you want to call it

  338. adiaholic has left

  339. adiaholic has joined

  340. Ge0rG

    Cisco doesn't have exclusive rights. We are just all too RMSsy to use our part

  341. !XSF_Martin

    'Normal people' usually know neither jabber nor xmpp. Only one guy said 'oh no, you're using Cisco jabber' as he is forced to use that at work.

  342. pep.

    They do have a product named Jabber. And they also have unlimited resource* (compared to the XSF or anybody in this room)

  343. pep.

    They do have a product named Jabber. And they also have unlimited resources* (compared to the XSF or anybody in this room)

  344. Ge0rG

    pep.: yes. Let's use "Ex-Em-Pee-Pee based federated Eye-Am chat network" as our end-user-facing term then.

  345. pep.

    Ge0rG, I understand all you're saying. This is not being RMSsy this is being cautious

  346. pep.

    (whatever RMSsy would mean)

  347. pep.

    (I guess it doesn't mean "cautious")

  348. Ge0rG

    pep.: religious about FLOSS-style Openness of everything

  349. adiaholic has left

  350. MattJ

    I don't think that's the reason

  351. pep.

    Ge0rG, yeah no that's not my reason, at least

  352. Daniel has left

  353. winfried has left

  354. winfried has joined

  355. winfried has left

  356. winfried has joined

  357. kokonoe has left

  358. winfried has left

  359. winfried has joined

  360. Neustradamus

    MattJ: https://www.jabber.org/: Jabber.org is the original IM service based on XMPP and one of the key nodes on the XMPP network. It is based on Isode M-Link, you know it ;) I hope an upgrade too, like the OS, there are some tickets about compatibility problems.

  361. Neustradamus

    And please note that the planet.jabber.org speaks about XMPP.

  362. stpeter has joined

  363. Neustradamus

    For French people, the problem is that some people speak always about Jabber instead of XMPP. Example, in 2012, the creation of a french "Loi 1901" association for the XMPP promotion with the old name. -> http://www.journal-officiel.gouv.fr/association/index.php?ctx=eJxtyjEKwyAUANB*FHHt4FeqaLcQKGRphriL2F9SSNUaW!jte4G8!YUNHg3CN0Pc95IgvCGVVkuLnURvRBfuSxVjuZNf6UUCUSMiZ!yo!V8lFnMuOZEYlmUep8FP840fbQ4hwUmi0xbPShptjXESrXIQ1me*frYNlIY*3JMyIg__&page=15&JTH_ID=005000&JTY_ID=ASSOCIATION

  364. nyco

    well, there is JabberFr.org, and still no xmppFr.org :)

  365. Holger

    The way French people speak is weird either way.

  366. Link Mauve

    Oui baguette.

  367. nyco

    das ist "true"

  368. winfried has left

  369. winfried has joined

  370. Neustradamus

    And please do not forget that I have requested the XMPPFR name for this association before the creation ;)

  371. nyco

    we may forget :)

  372. alexis has left

  373. Daniel has joined

  374. Link Mauve

    Neustradamus, this association exists since 2003.

  375. Link Mauve

    It was just a de facto association until 2012, at which point we officialised it to give us more resources (notably a bank account).

  376. nyco

    and the right to go to jail... :/

  377. nyco

    (we'll bring you oranges, don't worry...)

  378. nyco

    Board meeting time

  379. Seve

    Hello, how are you?

  380. Daniel has left

  381. Neustradamus

    The domain name jabberfr.org can exist but without to be an association ;)

  382. ralphm

    /bangs gavel

  383. ralphm

    0. Welcome + Agenda

  384. ralphm

    Hi all

  385. ralphm

    Who do we have

  386. Guus waves

  387. MattJ


  388. Seve


  389. nyco


  390. Daniel has joined

  391. ralphm

    Any additional items?

  392. Seve

    None here

  393. Ge0rG

    I would like to add an item

  394. Ge0rG

    specifically the "Post-Election Hand-Over Phase" email to members@ from 2019-11-07

  395. Ge0rG


  396. ralphm


  397. ralphm

    1. Minute taker

  398. UṣL has left

  399. pdurbin has joined

  400. stpeter has left

  401. ralphm


  402. jonas’

    sorry, I have to leave in a minute

  403. MattJ

    I'm explicitly not volunteering, I don't have time today

  404. nyco


  405. nyco


  406. nyco

    give it to me

  407. nyco

    but one "minute", not more... :)

  408. ralphm

    Thank you nyco.

  409. ralphm

    2. Post-Election Hand-Over Phase

  410. stpeter has joined

  411. Guus

    Just moving the date of the hand-over phase is a bit silly: we should define what we expect to happen between the election, and the handover.

  412. ralphm

    I think this is a good idea in itself.

  413. MattJ

    I don't really see the need for it, myself

  414. ralphm

    Practically, one of the issues is that it requires modification of our Bylaws, I believe.

  415. ralphm

    The start of a term currently coincides with the annual meetings

  416. ralphm

    And in previous years where this has come up, we said that this time of year is better to start work than January 1

  417. Chobbes has left

  418. Chobbes has joined

  419. nyco

    please follow and contribute: https://mensuel.framapad.org/p/qn9jumhvzk-2019-11-14-xsf-board-weekly-meeting

  420. Guus

    I can see how Jan 1st would have a lot of people absent.

  421. Seve

    Well, it could be the start of the period

  422. Alex has joined

  423. Guus

    I'm a bit ambiguous. What's the pragmatic solution we're looking for? What does this solve exactly?

  424. nyco

    Jan 1st is a bad idea: in northern hemispehere, it's cold, motivation down, nights are long, and... hangover

  425. nyco

    I guess a handover is more needed in the Council

  426. adiaholic has joined

  427. Guus

    There have been 20 handovers now? Did we ever run into issues, or anticipate issues in the future?

  428. ralphm

    Not really.

  429. ralphm

    Usually there's a bunch of overlap.

  430. ralphm

    Also, old Directors have been more than willing to help resolve ongoing issues.

  431. Guus

    I don't really mind changing it (although I'd dislike having to go through the hoops of getting the Bylaws changed), but I'm not seeing a need for it myself.

  432. nyco

    a handover/overlap does not have to be strict

  433. David Cridland

    FWIW, the main problem the Council has with "zero handover" is that some votes are terminated and re-run. I'd have thought that continuity in Board is a more pressing issue with the abrupt handover.

  434. nyco

    isn't it good to restart a vote with a new council?

  435. MattJ

    But it's not like it's a surprise, the election date is set far in advance

  436. ralphm

    I meant overlap as in the diff between Directors in subsequent terms being small.

  437. MattJ

    So don't start votes before the election date?

  438. David Cridland

    To be clear, the Council situation is not a problem for me.

  439. nyco

    yes, I remember, but I may be wrong, that we discussed in the past avoiding 100% of the board renewed at a new election, rigth?

  440. ralphm

    Generally, in all orgs I have served with, people tend to not take on larger things as their term nears completion.

  441. Guus

    If this solves an issue that we're suffering for, we should apply changes. If this is more of a theoretical exercise, I'm not in favor of spending effort on it.

  442. pdurbin has left

  443. Ge0rG

    MattJ: Last Calls have a very dynamic runtime, depending on how soon Council members cast their votes

  444. ralphm

    Guus: agreed

  445. nyco

    yes, the cost of changing the bylaws is quite high

  446. Chobbes has left

  447. MattJ

    Ge0rG, they are limited in length though, right? 2 weeks?

  448. ralphm

    Ge0rG: this is current practice, not what it is supposed to be. AFAIK, Council has 2 weeks to make judgement?

  449. Seve

    Maybe Council could discuss this issue?

  450. Seve

    As I can't talk for them

  451. Ge0rG

    MattJ: a Last Call vote is cast, and can go up to two weeks. Then there is the at-least-two-weeks Last Call period, and then there is a Council vote to advance, which can take up to two weeks

  452. Zash has left

  453. ralphm

    Seve: maybe, but procedurally, XEP-0001 makes Board responsible for Council's process. Of course with their imput.

  454. ralphm


  455. David Cridland

    MattJ, 2 weeks of Last Call plus 2 weeks of vote.

  456. Ge0rG

    so we are speaking of something between three and seven weeks.

  457. MattJ

    I don't see how a handover period helps

  458. ralphm


  459. David Cridland

    This is all a good argument for Council getting their votes in quicker, of course.

  460. ralphm


  461. MattJ

    You propse that ex-Council should still be entitled to vote?

  462. Guus

    Ge0rG has this actually lead to issues before, or do we foresee issues with that?

  463. MattJ

    What if new stuff comes up during handover period? Who votes on that?

  464. Seve

    > You propse that ex-Council should still be entitled to vote? Does not sound right :)

  465. Ge0rG

    Guus: yes, Last Calls fell under the carpet multiple times in the past

  466. Ge0rG

    sorry, I'm in a work meeting right now

  467. nyco

    >> You propse that ex-Council should still be entitled to vote? > Does not sound right :) seems fair to me as well: like in "finish stuff"?

  468. ralphm

    Ge0rG: well, Council not following their own process is something we can regret, but I don't feel that we have to change procedures at this point.

  469. MattJ

    Finish it before the election, or accept that the new Council takes over

  470. ralphm

    I've heard a bunch of opinions, and think we can put this to a motion.

  471. Seve

    nyco: I feel is a job for the new board/council to decide on following up with past and unfinished work or not, as opinions may change with elections

  472. ralphm moves we alter the start date of a new term for Council and Board, to achieve a "handover" period.

  473. ralphm


  474. nyco


  475. Guus

    0 is effectively -1, right?

  476. ralphm

    0 is a valid choice distinct from -1

  477. Guus

    but a majority of proponents is needed to carry, right?

  478. MattJ

    -1, unless a clearer proposal is drawn up, with a list of concrete benefits

  479. ralphm

    It is /not/ affirmative, however, so indeed 0s don't attribute to a motion being passed

  480. stpeter has left

  481. MattJ

    Happy to discuss my objection with anyone who still thinks this is a necessary thing to have

  482. ralphm

    Seve, Guus?

  483. Seve

    It is a bit abstract in some cases, I do think as MattJ

  484. Guus

    I'm 0, with the same argument as MattJ.

  485. Seve


  486. ralphm

    With 4x -1, 1x 0, this motion is rejected.

  487. ralphm

    Thanks for everyone's input!

  488. ralphm

    3. Web team

  489. ralphm

    This was discussed in the xsf@ room earlier this week.

  490. ralphm

    It basically comes down to unclarity of permissioning in GitHub

  491. Guus

    I don't think an XSF WorkTeam exists that is 'web team'. 'web team' is a group of users on Github only.

  492. ralphm

    AFAIR, MattJ was going to have a look at the current GitHub teams defined for the xsf org, and adjust according to XSF Work Teams, Council, Board.

  493. nyco

    and the technical process between GitHub repo and the live website

  494. ralphm

    There used to be a time where there was no comms team, and we did have people working on the web site

  495. nyco

    the website content, as far as I see it, does not belong only to commteam

  496. MattJ


  497. Guus

    I think it'd make sense to have at least everyone in the comms team to have the ability to change the website.

  498. MattJ

    This is already the case

  499. ralphm

    I think it would be fair to say that we'd at least want Comms Team, Board, and other Officers, to be able to alter the website.

  500. nyco

    we're officially 4 in the commteam, two are active these days

  501. Guus

    ralphm I have no objections to that either.

  502. Seve

    Agree ralphm

  503. ralphm

    And I believe that's entirely in line with instructions given to iteam in the past

  504. Guus

    Do we explicitly want to limit access to those groups though?

  505. Guus

    (eg: I got in webteam before I was on board)

  506. nyco

    open to iTeam as well

  507. ralphm

    I am happy for iteam to make decisions on (temporary) exceptions, or ask board when in doubt.

  508. ralphm

    nyco: iteam has access to all the things, right now, and I think that's fine

  509. Guus

    (nyco: this lists three, not four people for Comms : https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/comm-team.html)

  510. MattJ

    Guus, as I said the other day, if someone wants to contribute, I don't see why they shouldn't be in commteam

  511. nyco

    ok, thx

  512. MattJ

    We still accept PRs from non-members anyway, but only commteam would be able to merge them

  513. nyco


  514. ralphm

    MattJ: after appointment by Board, obviously.

  515. ralphm

    MattJ: indeed

  516. Daniel has left

  517. Guus

    Matt: I don't mind doing the occasional merge, but I don't want to be in commsteam.

  518. ralphm

    Guus: nor do I :-)

  519. Guus

    (as that implies more responsibilities than that I care to take on)

  520. ralphm

    MattJ (with his iteam hat on): is this sufficient instruction?

  521. MattJ

    Guus, I think you should be in commteam, or not merge, or we agree that Board also has website powers

  522. MattJ

    and if you lose your Board seat, you can't merge

  523. nyco

    huh... please: it's commteam, not commsteam, that may be read as "comm steam", which is wrong :)

  524. MattJ

    I don't think we should have an ambiguous web team

  525. ralphm

    nyco: whatever

  526. ralphm

    MattJ: make it so

  527. Guus

    MattJ I don't mind having an ambiguous web team, but won't object to that no longer being the case in the future.

  528. MattJ

    We agreed commteam+iteam, what about board?

  529. ralphm

    I mentioned Board above. I think they should have access, but generally let the Communications Team handle PRs

  530. Seve

    Board should have I think. To speed up processes as well.

  531. Guus

    board is not ment to be an operational entity, is it?

  532. MattJ

    Guus, access and responsibilities are different in my opinion

  533. Seve


  534. Guus

    I don't think it should be needed to have board be able to merge, but as it's in their mandate to apply changes, I'm not against them having access either.

  535. MattJ

    I think people we trust to steer the organisation we should also trust enough to give repo access to our website

  536. ralphm

    Board should be able to change the website without the consent of the Communications Team, should that need arise.

  537. ralphm


  538. MattJ

    Guus, note that you lose your ability to merge if we don't

  539. ralphm


  540. Guus

    I know

  541. ralphm


  542. Kev

    I think the alternative is an explicit webteam, approved by Board, chartered, whatever.

  543. Guus

    but that shouldn't drive my vote.

  544. MattJ

    ok, so I think we're good

  545. Kev

    And this seems easier than that :)

  546. ralphm


  547. ralphm

    4. AOB

  548. nyco

    we already have iteam, board, commteam, let them merge PRs

  549. ralphm

    (as we're already past 16:00)

  550. MattJ

    commteam manages website repo, iteam and board also have permissions

  551. Guus

    wfm. Maybe ask iteam to have an explicit check/update of permissions after elections?

  552. Kev

    Expectation being that iteam generally won't, unless it's a technical thing, but have the ability, right?

  553. Guus

    (I think that currently fails)

  554. ralphm

    Oh, the Mediawiki item is something for iteam, not Board.

  555. nyco


  556. Guus

    Kev: I'd say so, yes.

  557. nyco

    where should I report it then?

  558. Guus points at Matt

  559. ralphm

    with iteam, MattJ is their lead

  560. nyco


  561. kokonoe has joined

  562. ralphm

    5. Date of Next

  563. ralphm


  564. Seve


  565. MattJ


  566. ralphm

    6. Close Thanks all!

  567. Guus


  568. ralphm bangs gavel

  569. Guus


  570. Seve

    Super, thank you!

  571. nyco

    thx all

  572. nyco

    MattJ: our current Mediawiki version is unsupported, it would be nice to upgrade soon-ish, no pressure, no hurry, just to avoid some worries

  573. MattJ

    Yeah, thanks, it's on my radar

  574. nyco


  575. nyco

    please review the minutes draft before I send it: https://mensuel.framapad.org/p/qn9jumhvzk-2019-11-14-xsf-board-weekly-meeting?lang=fr

  576. Alex has left

  577. adiaholic has left

  578. adiaholic has joined

  579. Zash has joined

  580. Shell has left

  581. Chobbes has joined

  582. alexis has joined

  583. goffi has joined

  584. Alex has joined

  585. Daniel has joined

  586. jubalh has left

  587. arc has left

  588. arc has joined

  589. jubalh has joined

  590. Zash has left

  591. Zash has joined

  592. debacle has left

  593. Chobbes has left

  594. Shell has joined

  595. Chobbes has joined

  596. mathijs has left

  597. lorddavidiii has left

  598. lorddavidiii has joined

  599. mathijs has joined

  600. winfried has left

  601. winfried has joined

  602. jubalh has left

  603. Nekit has left

  604. debacle has joined

  605. Chobbes has left

  606. Chobbes has joined

  607. Nekit has joined

  608. pdurbin has joined

  609. neshtaxmpp has joined

  610. arc has left

  611. arc has joined

  612. sonny has left

  613. sonny has joined

  614. Nekit has left

  615. Nekit has joined

  616. Wojtek has left

  617. pdurbin has left

  618. adiaholic has left

  619. adiaholic has joined

  620. Shell has left

  621. kokonoe has left

  622. Nekit has left

  623. kokonoe has joined

  624. debacle has left

  625. Chobbes has left

  626. Chobbes has joined

  627. Steve Kille has left

  628. Wojtek has joined

  629. winfried has left

  630. winfried has joined

  631. Steve Kille has joined

  632. lovetox has joined

  633. winfried has left

  634. winfried has joined

  635. lovetox has left

  636. mathijs has left

  637. mathijs has joined

  638. lovetox has joined

  639. winfried has left

  640. winfried has joined

  641. winfried has left

  642. winfried has joined

  643. UṣL has joined

  644. APach has joined

  645. APach has left

  646. APach has joined

  647. mathijs has left

  648. mathijs has joined

  649. mathijs has left

  650. mathijs has joined

  651. pdurbin has joined

  652. jubalh has joined

  653. Chobbes has left

  654. jubalh has left

  655. adiaholic has left

  656. vanitasvitae has left

  657. vanitasvitae has joined

  658. pdurbin has left

  659. waqas has joined

  660. kokonoe has left

  661. Wojtek has left

  662. pep.

    So it's great stuff gets decided etc., as a newbie where can I learn about all that (starting in the xsf). Should task each team or board or.. To write this down somewhere when something gets changed?

  663. pep.

    So it's great stuff gets decided etc., as a newbie where can I learn about all that (starting in the xsf). Should we task each team or board or.. To write this down somewhere when something gets changed?

  664. pep.

    (I'm happy the website situation got "clarified" :))

  665. kokonoe has joined

  666. pdurbin has joined

  667. waqas has left

  668. waqas has joined

  669. jubalh has joined

  670. jubalh has left

  671. Yagiza has left

  672. j.r has left

  673. Shell has joined

  674. pdurbin has left

  675. Dele (Mobile) has left

  676. lorddavidiii has left

  677. lorddavidiii has joined

  678. lorddavidiii has left

  679. pep. has left

  680. pep. has joined

  681. mathijs has left

  682. mathijs has joined

  683. mathijs has left

  684. mathijs has joined

  685. rion

    Hi. regarding Jingle XEP. If some action doesn't explicitly state "action is used to add one or more new content definitions to the session", does it mean it's applicable to just one content definition?

  686. Chobbes has joined

  687. debacle has joined

  688. Nekit has joined

  689. !XSF_Martin has left

  690. !XSF_Martin has joined

  691. jubalh has joined

  692. kokonoe has left

  693. kokonoe has joined

  694. winfried has left

  695. winfried has joined

  696. winfried has left

  697. winfried has joined

  698. matkor has left

  699. matkor has joined

  700. jubalh has left

  701. winfried has left

  702. winfried has joined

  703. winfried has left

  704. winfried has joined

  705. karoshi has left

  706. karoshi has joined

  707. Shell has left

  708. andy has left

  709. pdurbin has joined

  710. LNJ has left

  711. andy has joined

  712. pdurbin has left

  713. !XSF_Martin has left

  714. !XSF_Martin has joined

  715. kokonoe has left

  716. kokonoe has joined

  717. Nekit has left

  718. MattJ

    Who is behind @xmpp@fosstodon.org on mastodon?

  719. jubalh has joined

  720. jubalh has left

  721. lovetox has left

  722. waqas has left

  723. vanitasvitae

    MattJ: i guess the 404 guy

  724. vanitasvitae


  725. Zash

    nyco? https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Social_Media#Mastodon_.28experiment.29

  726. goffi has left

  727. wurstsalat has left

  728. karoshi has left

  729. waqas has joined

  730. MattJ

    Ah, good

  731. stpeter has joined

  732. Chobbes has left

  733. kokonoe has left

  734. kokonoe has joined

  735. Chobbes has joined

  736. alameyo has left

  737. alameyo has joined

  738. alameyo has left