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 right
  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 https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/981/is-double-positive-meaning-negative-a-common-phenomenon
  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 Agreed
  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 o/
  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 https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/2019-November/009028.html
  396. ralphm Noted
  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 ok
  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 input
  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 Right
  459. David Cridland This is all a good argument for Council getting their votes in quicker, of course.
  460. ralphm Indeed
  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 -1
  474. nyco -1
  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 -1
  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 Yeah
  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 oops
  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 Hmmm
  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 Yes
  538. MattJ Guus, note that you lose your ability to merge if we don't
  539. ralphm :-)
  540. Guus I know
  541. ralphm Ok
  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 Indeed
  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 ok
  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 ok
  561. kokonoe has joined
  562. ralphm 5. Date of Next
  563. ralphm +1W
  564. Seve +1
  565. MattJ wfm
  566. ralphm 6. Close Thanks all!
  567. Guus wfm
  568. ralphm bangs gavel
  569. Guus Thanks
  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 thx
  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 404.city
  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