marc_> Making it non-public and having a long random name works like a password
With the difference that a password coule easily be changed whereas the group name not
Ge0rGmarc_: changing a MUC password will throw everybody out
nycohttps://fosstodon.org/web/statuses/103290294377276459 is this for iTeam?
ZashWhich RSS feed?
nycothat's my doubt: could be our blog, or the planet
that's why I ask
Zashhttps://xmpp.org/feeds/all.atom.xml has eg `<link href="/" rel="alternate"/>`
Ge0rGI wonder if this isn't a bug in the respective feed readers instead.
mukt2has left
Zashnyco: Maybe ask them where exactly they're seeing that?
mukt2has joined
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
jubalhhas left
mimi89999has left
Wojtekhas joined
sonnyhas left
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
ralphmIf I miss the Board meeting today, it means I've finally beaten jetlag. Bear with me 🤣
mukt2has left
eevvoorhas joined
sonnyhas joined
pdurbinhas joined
Shellhas joined
eevvoorhas left
mukt2has joined
pdurbinhas left
lskdjfhas joined
kokonoehas left
GuusSay hi to Bear! 😉
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
kokonoehas joined
!XSF_Martinhas joined
Neustradamushas left
Neustradamushas joined
dwd<reaction>🤣</reaction>
kokonoehas left
ZashU wut m8?
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
SeveGuus, ralphm, I cannot join today unfortunately.
Guus🎶 No more monkeys jumping on the bed
mukt2has left
!XSF_Martinhas left
DebXWoodyGuus: 😂
kokonoehas joined
mukt2has joined
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
mimi89999has joined
Danielhas left
eevvoorhas joined
eevvoorhas left
eevvoorhas joined
intosihas left
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
Danielhas joined
eevvoorhas left
eevvoorhas joined
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
calvinhas joined
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
jubalhhas joined
j.rhas left
kokonoehas left
j.rhas joined
kokonoehas joined
adiaholichas left
pdurbinhas joined
adiaholichas joined
Danielhas left
kokonoehas left
intosihas joined
Danielhas joined
adiaholichas left
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
pdurbinhas left
kokonoehas joined
moparisthebesthas joined
gavhas left
mukt2has left
gavhas joined
mukt2has joined
waqashas joined
j.rhas left
krauqhas left
UṣLhas left
!XSF_Martinhas joined
krauqhas joined
pep.Is it now?
pep.Or in an hour? I haven't got my timezones right
KevI love it when an Experimental XEP gets published, discussion happens on-list, and genuinely significant improvements can then be made because of the community suggestions.
intosihas left
Guusit's now.
pep.poke MattJ
GuusTime for the board meeting. Paging pep. MattJ ralphm - Seve mentioned he wasn't going to be here.
pep.ralphm, not here then? Seve not here that we know
Guushmm
Guusjust you and me?
pep.indeed
GuusNo quorum then.
GuusI can help you with one of the things that you added to the agenda: https://trello.com/c/nAXUNr47/378-google-mentor-summit-expenses
GuusI don't think we need to discuss this.
pep.that'd be great
GuusWe've already agreed.
pep.poke peter and get money back?
GuusSo you can simply talk to the Treasurer (Peter)
GuusHe'll ask you for an expense sheet.
Guusbut yeah. There's no board decision to be made here - unless I'm missing something?
pep.larma, ^
pep.I don't think so, I was just unsure
GuusAs you helpfully linked on Trello: board already voted in favor of this.
pep.As for the other items, (made the list public and open history), we can continue discussing this on-list. I guess we could also vote on-list? Does something prevent this?
GuusSo, unless Peter has concerns that I'm unaware of, you should be good.
pep.Does everything have to be done in meetings?
GuusNo - but if you want to discuss on list, you probably should do it on the member list, not board - for reasons you expressed yourself.
pep.It seems to me absent's opinions are just discarded otherwise if they haven't expressed them beforehand
Guus(that board list is mostly used for basic "sorry, can't make it" type of comms)
pep.Guus, well board hasn't decided anything wrt. these. I'd be happy to start doing it though
Guuswithout Quorum, there's no vote.
intosihas joined
pep.without quorum "at a specific point in time during the week"?
Guuswe can discuss on list, but a vote should be called in a meeting, I think.
pep.Anyway I'll raise this point as well
GuusDetails will be in the bylaws.
pep.I guess we can leave this here
Guusok. Back to work with me!
Yagizahas left
Guusttyl
pep.thanks
adiaholichas joined
MattJSorry, unexpectedly can't make it today
pep.We've already closed for the day, please come back next week :P
dwdI don't think you actually need to make decisions at meeting. See XSF Bylaws §5.8 which seems to explicitly cover this.
pep.Yep, looks good to me
dwdThough it *appears* to read as if only unanimous decisions can be made that way.
lorddavidiiihas left
pep.hmm. I'd like to have meetings be an extension of "action without a meeting" and not the opposite. (Just a place to sync up if required, not something you have to attend or be ignored. I extrapolate but this doesn't seem to far from the truth to me)
lorddavidiiihas joined
calvinhas left
dwdI suspect an effective way for the Board to operate would be to vote on things on list, and only hold meetings when things are conetntious (ie, not unanimous). That appears to conform to the bylaws, and you can make such a rule of procedure under §5.10 should you wish.
j.rhas joined
dwdOr at least, only vote at things at meetings.
pep.What do you mean with that last message?
KevI would suggest making 'the list' be members@ rather than board@ though (which is Board policy anyway, instituted a few Boards ago, to do business on members@ unless something has to be out of camera (sic)).
dwdKev, "in camera", not "out of camera". "Camera" here is the Latin word for room.
KevIndeed.
KevThat's why the (sic) to show I knew what I was doing and it wasn't a mistake :p
dwdKev, Ah, yes.
intosihas left
pep.Kev, yep that's more or less what is being discussed on board@ atm. I'd want that as well.
Kevpep.: It's already Board policy, FWIW.
pep.Well I'm not even sure where to find this information anyway..
KevI pushed Board on it a number of years ago, and they agreed. So unless a subsequent Board have overturned that (I'm not aware of this).
KevI pushed Board on it a number of years ago, and they agreed. So unless a subsequent Board have overturned that (I'm not aware of this)...
pep.So who knows what policy board has now
dwdKev, I don't know that Boards bind subsequent boards as to rules of procedure. Nor do I know how a Board would even know about previous rules of procedure.
KevI'd assume that Board decisions are lasting until overturned.
Yagizahas joined
KevTo do otherwise doesn't make sense in most cases.
KevSo I don't see why rules of procedure should be different really.
KevBut, at least, there's no pratical way of knowing this as Boards' continuity isn't always the best.
Kev(As you say)
!XSF_Martinhas left
eevvoorhas left
!XSF_Martinhas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
ralphmIt might indeed be useful to gather such decisions and write them up in one place. Maybe even as simple as wiki page.
pep.yep. I suggested that to board the other day. We should do the same
pep.yep. I suggested that to council the other day. We should do the same
ralphmBut indeed, unless confidentiality is required, everything should really go to members@
pep.ralphm, can you put that in writing on the list? So far only Guus from board expressed an opinion
Guuspep. this is already happening. It's kind of weird to announce that we're not going to do anything in private, if we're not doing anything in private anyways.
dwdGuus, You could announce youre continuing to do so. You never know, it might generate a bit of interest in what the Board is up to.
Guus*shrug*
Shellhas left
eevvoorhas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
!XSF_Martinhas joined
pdurbinhas joined
pdurbinhas left
lorddavidiiihas left
kokonoehas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
Shellhas joined
rionhas left
rionhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
!XSF_Martinhas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
kokonoehas joined
andyhas left
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
andyhas joined
lorddavidiiihas joined
stpeterhas joined
calvinhas joined
zukzukhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
!XSF_Martinhas joined
stpeterhas left
eevvoorhas left
Shellhas left
!XSF_Martinhas left
eevvoorhas joined
intosihas joined
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
Vaulorhas left
Sevehas left
Sevehas joined
Vaulorhas joined
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas joined
kokonoehas left
lovetoxhas joined
Steve Killehas left
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
mukt2has left
pdurbinhas joined
kokonoehas joined
Steve Killehas joined
stpeterhas joined
pdurbinhas left
intosihas left
mukt2has joined
Nekithas left
stpeterhas left
Shellhas joined
Douglas Terabytehas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
mukt2has left
Douglas Terabytehas left
mukt2has joined
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
stpeterhas joined
mukt2has left
calvinhas left
mukt2has joined
calvinhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
calvinhas left
UṣLhas joined
stpeterhas left
adiaholichas left
krauqhas left
!XSF_Martinhas joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
kokonoehas left
calvinhas joined
Danielhas left
eevvoorhas left
Danielhas joined
mathijshas left
mathijshas joined
Yagizahas left
matkorhas left
matkorhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas joined
mukt2has left
kokonoehas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
!XSF_Martinhas joined
rionhas left
Nekithas joined
mukt2has joined
pdurbinhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
krauqhas joined
mathijshas left
mathijshas joined
!XSF_Martinhas joined
pdurbinhas left
!XSF_Martinhas left
!XSF_Martinhas joined
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
stpeterhas joined
zukzukhas left
SpaceFreak aka Tracerhas joined
stpeterhas left
mukt2has left
debaclehas left
SpaceFreak aka Tracerhas left
SpaceFreak aka Tracerhas joined
Nekithas left
SpaceFreak aka Tracerhas left
Wojtekhas left
SpaceFreak aka Tracerhas joined
lovetoxKev, i fear if we dont work out exactly how fastening should be used with MAM, this will end in failure.
stpeterhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
lovetoxEven if it is its own XEP, if it ends not working with MAM perfectly its probably useless
lskdjf> Kev, i fear if we dont work out exactly how fastening should be used with MAM, this will end in failure.
<reaction>👍️</reaction>
eevvoorhas joined
kokonoehas left
SpaceFreak aka Tracerhas left
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
Ge0rGI disagree on that. Fastening adds a semantic relationship to messages. That's more than we have now, and I'm sure it's enough for fetching messages that belong together
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
mukt2has joined
!XSF_Martinhas joined
lovetoxyeah kind of the point, we dont have it now so no problems
lovetoxafterwards everyone starts fastening X stuff together
lovetoxthen you get problems
kokonoehas joined
Ge0rGlovetox: do you have a specific problem in mind?
lovetoxmostly reactions
lovetoxjoining 20 groupchats already takes much time with querying 20 archives, it will become a pain if i have to download 1000 message reactions
stpeterhas left
lovetoxand this is surley just the first new thing someone invents that uses fastening
lovetoxoverall i expect it will result in much more messages sent
lovetoxlike chatstates and markers already did
Ge0rGlovetox: but with the current state of affairs, things like LMC from MAM are already broken
lovetoxright now its bearable traffic wise, but i feel its on the edge
Ge0rGlovetox: so you are opposed to more messages, and not to messages being semantically linked?
Ge0rGlovetox: MAM2 is planned to provide all reactions inline for a given message
lovetoxim opposed to inventing tools to raise traffic without at the same time specifing methods to deal with it in a sane manner
Ge0rGThat will vastly reduce your traffic problem
lovetoxGe0rG, thats the point "its planned" is not good enough
Ge0rGlovetox: then you should oppose reactions, not fastening
larmaI think right now it only works because few send read markers in larger MUCs... It's basically already "broken"
DanielI don't think he is opposing fastening
mukt2has left
lovetoxjust lets thing this through to the end, thats all im saying
lovetoxjust lets think this through to the end, thats all im saying
pep.lovetox, would you prefer something like "all the meta-stuff (reactions, lmc, etc.) is requested separately"?
lovetoxi was just throwing ideas out, i dont know if this is the best solution
lovetoxbut yeah, some MAM filter like, give me all messages that are not fastening
lovetoxthen afterwards, query the meta stuff, but the problem here is
lovetoxnot all fastening messages are meta
lovetoxas i think dave mentioned on the list
lovetoxthere are 3 categorys
lovetoxreactions is just one, if we put lmc, markers, quotes, comments in this
lovetoxthen we need real smart logic on the server to make these decisions
Daniel> there are 3 categorys
> reactions is just one, if we put lmc, markers, quotes, comments in this
> then we need real smart logic on the server to make these decisions
Yeah. Fastening is really complex right now. That's why I want proof that MAM will be able to handle that
DanielOr else we might have to reduce complexity
pep.I'm only catching up on the "Resurrecting Fastening" thread. And I see Xabber people saying "with aggregated counter, where message is returned with a number of attachments it currently has. Possibly, aggregated on type (6 😂 3 😡 1 👍 1 💩), *without *authorship of those attachments". Is anybody actually on board with this? Because I don't like that I'd be missing authorship info :/
pep.("on-board" as in, "agrees with this")
lovetoxreactions without authorship is the most useless thing i heard
lovetoxsomeone like my comment but i dont know who, great
lovetox:D
ZashFeature! Anonymous voting!
krauqhas left
DanielI may or may not be fine with it for the special case of reactions. But if fastening has a general aggregation mechanism there will certainly be cases where we need authorship
lskdjfyeah reactions without authorship don't make sense at all. Every messenger I know that can do reactions provides the information about who reacted.
pep.I mean I would understand applications not displaying authorship info right away (at first glance) but yeah I don't want to lose that info
larmathe idea is that you get the summary without authorship, but also have the ability to request the details with authorship
pep.larma, that's quite specific to one kind of UI possibility though
larmayes, that is really specific about reactions
pep.Even for reactions I mean
debaclehas joined
krauqhas joined
pep.Not that I have other UI suggestions right now, but I wouldn't want to see optimisations for every single possible UI in the protocol
larmaThat's why I wrote in one of my mails:
> I can hardly imagine summarizing to work in a generic way. The only thing that makes sense to me is to have the procedure to summarize a certain fastening defined with that specific fastening (e.g. in the reactions XEP for reactions) and not generically. This also implies that servers may not be aware of how to summarize certain fastenings and thus clients would always have to be ready to ask for the raw messages for these if they want to display them (obviously servers should announce via disco which they do support).
andrey.ghas left
larmapep., I think that's fine for reactions, everyone probably agrees that you don't want to display authorship directly in the message history
pep.That's a valid statement in our circles
DanielI think aggregation can work. But since MAM and aggregation is 90% of the reason we are doing fastening in the first place i don't think it makes sense to release fastening without that
lovetoxexactly.
stpeterhas joined
larmaI think there is two different kinds of aggregation and people like to mix these two
DanielThere are multiple kinds of aggregation because fasting mixes multiple kind of references
larmasummary style / processed aggregation (6 😂 3 😡 1 👍 1 💩) and message-based aggregation (where you basically get the original message details without further modification)
DanielI think we might be able to do without the processed ones
DanielJust give me all the wrapped raw data
DanielWith the message that they were fastened to
DanielI can count them myself
DanielBut either way. It just further drives home the point that we need to think that together
DanielAnd not just come up with a new attach-to/reference/fasten element
DanielThat is the boring part of it
larmaTotally agree
ZashAre there some kind of stats on ratio of "normal" messages to reactions?
!XSF_Martinhas left
pdurbinhas joined
DanielReactions specifically?
DanielOr all kind of references?
ZashThat "query MAM, get 1 messagage and 19 reactions" scenario sounds a bit exaggerated
krauqhas left
pep.Zash, s/reactions/chatstates/ ?
ZashNo chatstates in MAM
sonnyhas left
lovetoxreally? just look at facebook, one post can have 1000 reactions
ZashWeren't we going to send chat states over presence?
ZashFacebook isn't chat
lovetoxConversations room has 200+ joined people
lovetoxif Daniel, says C is for free for the next 5 days
lovetoxprobably 70+ people give thumbs up
lovetoxi pull these numbers out of my ass
lovetoxbut it will be more than 19
ZashYeah but how often are there that kind of reaction-triggering messages?
lovetoxthe thing is if you give people the UI to react with one click
lovetoxthey will use it
DanielYeah. You don't know. I mean you probably won't hit an average of 19:1. But it's annoying if the last message sent was one that received a 100 up votes. Than you have two mam pages of just garbage
ZashI'm not sure designing something based on numbers you got from *where* is the best.
ZashHence stats.
lovetoxZash are you aware that reactions dont exist?
lovetoxhow would we gather stats about a feature that does not exist
ZashI'm perfectly aware that they do exist, just not in XMPP.
lovetoxlets just say we have experience with chat markers
lovetoxand chatstates
lovetoxand before you say they are not stored in MAM
lovetoxyes there was a time prosody stored them
DanielI don't know. There is an angry Twitter post from the xabber people about read markers being in mam or what ever
ZashAnd most rooms aren't the 200+ conversations@ room.
DanielGo ask them for stats 😉
pep.Zash, find a somewhat popular mattermost instance, I think they can easily get you a ratio?
pep.Running queries in the db
Zashpep., that's what I'm talking about
lovetoxwe have to design the XEPs still in a way that they are able to scale, even if xmpp is not big at the moment
lorddavidiiihas left
ZashDesigning something to scale by making up imaginary numers?
pdurbinhas left
Ge0rGWe have designed XEPs in the past to cover all potential use cases. PEP, Message Archival and MIX come to mind.
DanielI'm not really sure I understand Zash's argument here. That we don't need fastening at all?
DanielI mean to me it doesn't matter if we are aggregating 5 or 100 reactions
stpeterhas left
krauqhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas joined
lovetoxthis does also mean a lot more load for servers
lovetoxi would implement this like, query all reaction authors on mouse over of the reaction
lovetoxi bet many servers will not be able to handle that
eevvoorhas left
LNJhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
sonnyhas joined
kokonoehas left
Shellhas left
kokonoehas joined
!XSF_Martinhas joined
calvinhas left
krauqhas left
lovetoxhas left
mukt2has joined
krauqhas joined
KevFor the record (and it's late and I'm not going to get into a big discussion right now - send it to list), I am onboard with the summary being a summary (e.g. just the reaction counts per reaction), and if you want further information, including the senders, that you do a further query to ask for it.
mukt2has left
sjaakhas joined
SpaceFreak aka Tracerhas joined
karoshihas left
sjaakhas left
sjaakhas joined
Tobiashas left
sonnyhas left
sjaakhas left
sjaakhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas left
Shellhas joined
!XSF_Martinhas joined
Archas joined
ArcOk I really hate being the kind of person who laughs at someone's misfortune, but https://www.zdnet.com/article/russian-police-raid-nginx-moscow-office/ has really brightened my day
SpaceFreak aka Tracerhas left
ArcNGINX Inc - the company who's CEO is a former rugby teammate - who's excited mood for hiring me soured over their non-competition clause extending to /all/ FOSS development.
ArcNGINX Inc - who's employee contract claims ownership over every FOSS contribution you make as an employee even on your own time, and forbids you from submitting patches to other FOSS projects without permission, now ironically raided by russian police after their lead developer's former employer claims ownership over NGINX because their employee contract has the same clause
XSF Discussion - 2019-12-12