XSF Discussion - 2020-06-11

  1. Jeybe

    This months newsletter on the XMPP Blog is broken. https://xmpp.org/2020/06/newsletter/ returns 404 not found.

  2. Zash

    Known issue, waiting for a fix.

  3. Jeybe

    Ok, nice

  4. Jeybe

    Also, could it be that the RSS Feed doesn't return the URL of the original article? When trying to open the article from Nextcloud News in a browser it just displays about:blank where other feeds open the respective webpage

  5. Zash

    The real URL is https://xmpp.org/2020/06/newsletter-09-june/

  6. Zash

    at least currently

  7. emus

    Jeybe: Thanks for reporting, Im fixing this later

  8. Jeybe


  9. edhelas

    emus can you please check the Atom validity of the feed as well ?

  10. edhelas


  11. emus

    hmm, I actually have no clue on this? 😩️

  12. emus

    can you ask the the CommTeam muc?

  13. emus

    But thanks for your feedback!

  14. jonas’

    what does a stream reset look like in XMPP over WebSockets?

  15. jonas’

    do I just send <open/> again?

  16. Zash


  17. Guus

    Board meeting time

  18. Seve says hi

  19. ralphm bangs gavel

  20. ralphm

    0. Welcome + Agenda

  21. ralphm


  22. MattJ


  23. ralphm

    pep., ?

  24. pep.


  25. ralphm

    Any comments on the agenda?

  26. pep.

    None from me

  27. MattJ

    None from me

  28. pep.

    I apologize I still haven't provided minutes for two weeks ago.. :/

  29. Guus

    No agenda items from me

  30. Seve

    Same as the rest :)

  31. ralphm

    1. Minute taker

  32. pep.

    I think one of the agenda item is appropriate here

  33. ralphm

    I saw a discussion item on this, suggesting cycling

  34. pep.


  35. ralphm

    I am in favor, but want to submit that chairing and keeping minutes is far from ideal.

  36. ralphm

    any other opinions?

  37. Guus

    Why keep minutes?

  38. Guus

    we have a written record

  39. Seve

    We have the logs though?

  40. Seve


  41. ralphm


  42. Guus

    what we keep so far is incomplete, at best.

  43. Zash

    minutes := agenda + decisions roughly

  44. Kev

    I suggest that minutes (which aren't really minutes in this case, but a collection of conclusions) are reasonable to ensure everyone is on the same page about what was agreed, and also because there's no reason members should have to read through pages of text to work out what happened :)

  45. pep.

    ralphm, when you're not here it happens often that I chair and send minutes

  46. pep.

    I do it after the fact and there's that

  47. Seve

    Many times you need to go to the actual record to understand the context

  48. ralphm

    I feel that we can't expect our members to read the logs of our meetings. Minutes are meant to be a summary of the items discussed, especially the outcomes.

  49. Seve

    We all want minutes but nobody steps up

  50. Guus

    sure - but no-one has interest in compiling them, and we've never done a round of verification that everyone agrees with what was sent out as minutes actually is a good representation of the meeting.

  51. Guus

    so, their value appears negligible to me

  52. pep.

    Guus, as you said it last week there is no round of verification because there is no regular minutes

  53. Seve

    The one thing we could try is a bot as MattJ mentioned

  54. pep.

    (so the other way around)

  55. MattJ

    Yes, I still think a bot is the answer

  56. pep.

    Seve, we need an intermediary solution

  57. ralphm

    I don't agree, and if we can't get this basic stuff down, one might wonder if holding meetings is useful

  58. pep.

    What happens during the time we don't have one

  59. MattJ

    The status quo is the intermediary solution

  60. pep.

    The status quo is crap. I don't like compiling minutes and yet I do it because nobody else wants.

  61. MattJ

    I agree

  62. Zash

    The pro-tip I've heard is to write the minutes beforehand, then use that as agenda.

  63. pep.

    I do think minutes are important as ralphm says

  64. pep.

    Great interest I see :)

  65. ralphm

    I fact, we are required to keep minutes in our bylaws. The bylaws do say that unless otherwise decided by a resolution of the Board of Directors, that role defaults to the Secretary. I can't remember Board meetings where this was the case, so I'm not sure how the current situation came to be. Up until recently we usually had one volunteer from the floor that would keep all minutes for Board meetings, but alas that's no longer the case.

  66. ralphm

    (pep. took some time to type :-D )

  67. jonas’

    do I see this correctly that you’re nearly half into your meeting and need a minute taker?

  68. MattJ

    As usual

  69. jonas’

    1. you should change channels to council@

  70. pep.

    (yeah sorry I wasn't showing chatstates)

  71. jonas’

    2. I’ll do it this time

  72. ralphm

    jonas’, actually we're discussing the persistent lack of minute takers as an agenda item, but yeah

  73. pep.

    jonas’, that doesn't solve the question

  74. jonas’

    I didn’t see the start of the agendum

  75. jonas’

    if you already have a minute taker I’m going to wander off

  76. ralphm

    jonas’, no please

  77. jonas’

    (or if you prefer to ponder that question over actually starting the meeting, because I don’t intend to spend an hour on this ;)

  78. jonas’

    (or if you prefer to ponder that question over actually starting the meeting, because I don’t intend to spend an hour on this ;))

  79. ralphm

    jonas’, we're still at 1.

  80. jonas’

    so here, I volunteer :)

  81. ralphm


  82. pep.

    Now maybe we can start the discussion re minutes :p

  83. ralphm

    If nothing else, I'll send a mail to our Membership about this, asking for someone that can do this weekly.

  84. jonas’ infers ## 2. General Lack of Minute Takers

  85. pep.

    And if nobody volunteers? We want automation, great, but in the meantime I think we need to get our hands dirty

  86. ralphm

    2. Lack of minute takes (<= retroactively)

  87. pep.

    (and by "we" I mean all of board, not just one of board)

  88. ralphm

    I motion that lacking a volunteer, we round robin alphabetically by first name.

  89. emus

    pep.: do you need help with the minutes?

  90. pep.

    emus, "I" don't, board does

  91. ralphm

    emus, we are looking for a permanent solution for someone taking and sending minutes every Board meeting

  92. pep.

    ralphm, what to do in case somebody is absent

  93. jonas’

    what we do at work is to continue the rotation and let them catch up next time

  94. pep.

    (it's a common use-case)

  95. jonas’

    what we do at work is to continue the rotation and let them do it next time.

  96. ralphm

    pep., do we really need to go through exceptions already?

  97. pep.

    I'd say that's the default

  98. emus

    I think rotation is a good thing too

  99. pep.

    But ok

  100. ralphm

    +1, by the way

  101. pep.

    I'm +1 regarding the motion otherwise

  102. Guus


  103. MattJ

    +1 until we have a better solution

  104. Seve


  105. ralphm

    Motion carries, barely.

  106. Seve

    Prefer to use our efforts on the bot instead

  107. Seve

    Prefer to put our efforts on the bot instead

  108. pep.

    Seve, I think you're missing the point

  109. pep.

    Yes we also want a bot

  110. ralphm

    I'm ok with somebody working on a bot to assist assembling minutes, but that's just a tool IMO

  111. MattJ

    If I have it ready by next week this was mostly a pointless discussion...

  112. pep.

    Now we don't even have a clue of who's taking care of that

  113. jonas’

    (someone who likes python could take the councilbot I started and extend it where necessary)

  114. ralphm

    3. Send board agenda to the list

  115. ralphm


  116. pep.


  117. jonas’

    (what is this item about?)

  118. pep.

    It was mentioned 2 weeks(?) ago, that being able to prepare for these meetings would be helpful. Just like council does

  119. jonas’


  120. jonas’

    (thanks, that’ll do)

  121. ralphm

    If you mean that board members need to be prepared, I don't understand why reading the trello isn't sufficient. That said, I am happy to send out an agenda.

  122. ralphm

    4. Communications Person

  123. ralphm

    do we have an update here?

  124. pep.

    I think the matter surfaced when somebody couldn't access trello.

  125. pep.

    (And I agree with that anyway)

  126. pep.

    No update for 4.

  127. jonas’

    I’d like to throw in as a sidenote that sending an agenda in advance to the list is also for the benefit of non-Board members (or in our case, non-Council members) so that they can attend from the floor if there are matters they care about.

  128. ralphm

    pep. regarding trello, that board doesn't require login, it is public.

  129. ralphm

    jonas’, good point

  130. pep.

    ralphm, it's not "public" in countries where trello is not allowing access from :)

  131. ralphm

    pep., wow, that's the first I hear about it

  132. Guus

    can we move on?

  133. ralphm


  134. ralphm

    5. AOB

  135. pep.

    None from me

  136. MattJ


  137. emus


  138. emus

    if the bot can do it, we should rotate till the bot is done

  139. emus

    just my 2ct

  140. Guus

    https://xmpp.work happened. JC was wondering if/how we want to link that from xmpp.org, and who gets to decide on that.

  141. ralphm

    Do we host that?

  142. pep.

    on "linking that from xmpp.org" or "on xmpp.work"?

  143. emus

    I intented to make some suggestions to the xsf website, this linking aswell

  144. Guus

    We do not host that, as far as I know.

  145. MattJ

    We don't host it, JC does, and requested that we simply link to it

  146. ralphm

    I'm happy for us linking to it. I suggest we ask the comms team to make that happen.

  147. Seve

    If the XSF links to it, the XSF has to manage it

  148. Seve

    If the XSF link to it, the XSF has to manage it

  149. pep.

    I agree with Seve here

  150. jonas’

    I don’t

  151. Seve

    If the XSF links to it, the XSF has to manage it

  152. Guus

    I don't think that's true

  153. pep.

    (on this specific matter)

  154. ralphm

    I don't agree we need to manage it

  155. Guus

    we're also linking to other stuff that we're not managing.

  156. MattJ

    xmpp.org links to lots of things the XSF doesn't manage

  157. jonas’

    the XSF links to a lot of things it doesn’t manage, such as a bunch of client/server software websites. And even a public server list. And I don’t quite see how this is a lot different.

  158. Seve

    Motion carries then :)

  159. pep.

    I agre with Seve that we need to manage xmpp.work

  160. pep.

    Or at least that we can moderate what goes in

  161. MattJ

    I'm glad that a jobs board for XMPP now exists, and it's maintained by a trusted community member

  162. MattJ

    I'm more than happy to link to it, because we've needed this for a long time

  163. ralphm

    If JC's intent was to hand it over, I'd not be opposed to consider that. I don't yet see why we /must/ host it before linking to it.

  164. Seve

    Me too, hope I can get a job soon on XMPP!

  165. Guus

    what are the arguments for XSF needing to manage such a list

  166. Guus

    what are the arguments for XSF needing to manage such a list?

  167. pep.

    Moderation would be one

  168. Seve

    Guus, that was supposed to help the XSF

  169. Seve

    I proposed the job to help gather sponsors and the like

  170. Guus

    I don't think so. This is supposed to help the XMPP ecosystem

  171. Guus

    (not the XSF)

  172. Seve

    The way you guys want to do it, does not allow for that

  173. Seve


  174. ralphm

    In a previous meeting we clearly discussed (around a marketing person) what we'd like the XSF to do short term. A job board was one of the key items and linking to it is sufficient to for now.

  175. Guus

    I don't see a reason why the XSF should need to moderate that list

  176. Guus

    I do hope that it is moderated - but I don't think the XSF is required to be involved in the moderation process.

  177. Daniel

    just be happy that someone stepped up to acutally create it? - if it turns into a mess you can always remove it again

  178. ralphm

    Agreed, and also, if the XSF would indeed host it, I think the about page might be problematic as-is. That said, I'm very happy JC made this happen.

  179. Seve

    Then I don't see why is an issue for discussion for the XSF?

  180. jonas’

    linking on the websiet is

  181. jonas’

    linking on the website is

  182. pep.

    it's commteam's job

  183. jonas’

    so nothing to decide here (/me looks at the clock)

  184. jonas’

    so nothing to decide here (/me looks at the clock)?

  185. ralphm

    Seve: I hadn't registered the connection to sponsorship. My thinking here, though, is that if we have more community because of this, that might indirectly mean more support for the XSF, either in terms of sponsorship, or working on specs.

  186. Seve

    ralphm, my idea was to support the job and provide sponsors with highlighted/featured jobs, promote them ,etc

  187. ralphm

    I motion we ask our comms team to link to the jobs board at https://xmpp.work/

  188. MattJ


  189. Guus


  190. ralphm


  191. MattJ

    Seve, I like that idea, and perhaps we can still make it happen

  192. Seve


  193. ralphm

    Seve: that's a great idea. We can discuss that separately with JC.

  194. MattJ

    But not necessary for just getting something live

  195. pep.

    I wish I could say on-list.

  196. Guus

    Let's use what we have now - instead of wait for something to materialize that hasn't done so for ages.

  197. ralphm

    pep., you can, if you want

  198. ralphm

    However, it seems the motion carries.

  199. jonas’

    oh, Board has different rules?

  200. emus

    > just be happy that someone stepped up to acutally create it? - if it turns into a mess you can always remove it again I intended to say the same. And also that we should care about it, as there were approaches and wishes on that already.

  201. Seve

    (support the job board*)

  202. pep.

    jonas’, no veto, majority of quorum to pass

  203. jonas’


  204. pep.

    And afaik I have never seen a vote pass on to list :x

  205. ralphm

    jonas’, indeed the Council's way of voting also includes terms and stuff, we haven't done that as far as I know

  206. jonas’

    ralphm, ah, TIL

  207. jonas’

    not important for this meeting though, I trust you as chair to not lie :)

  208. jonas’

    not important for this meeting though, I trust you as chair (and everyone on Board, actually) to not lie about or fudge votes :)

  209. ralphm

    I see 3x +1, 1x -1, and a not-yet-vote. I'd prefer to tell comms team to go ahead.

  210. ralphm

    pep., could your concern be treated orthogonally?

  211. pep.

    Well if motion carries it carries. It's just that I don't have a clear enough opinion to vote yet

  212. emus

    > I see 3x +1, 1x -1, and a not-yet-vote. I'd prefer to tell comms team to go ahead. Ack from my side

  213. ralphm

    I'll take that as a 0. Motion carries.

  214. ralphm

    6. Date of Next

  215. ralphm


  216. pep.

    (which is different from 0, IMO)

  217. ralphm

    pep., noted, I'll retract that

  218. ralphm

    7. Close

  219. ralphm

    Thanks all!

  220. ralphm bangs gavel

  221. pep.


  222. emus


  223. MattJ

    ...thanks :) (especially to jonas’)

  224. pep.

    And thanks jonas’, and others who come chime in :)

  225. ralphm


  226. emus

    And thanks to jcbrand to getting that up

  227. jonas’

    minutes go to members@ and what else?

  228. ralphm

    that's it

  229. ralphm

    Oh, and decisions go on our wiki

  230. pep.

    (that does need updating..)

  231. jonas’


  232. ralphm

    pep., yeah, I was looking for them :/

  233. pep.

    There are minutes in between that can be used to fill that in. A bot would certainly help here. atm it's just more work

  234. ralphm


  235. ralphm

    pep., agreed

  236. ralphm

    there's no overview page either. Possibly it'd be better to have a page per Board term.

  237. pep.

    might be

  238. ralphm

    I do indeed think that a bot would be helpful for this.

  239. pep.

    There are older board pages also

  240. ralphm

    yeah, at one point, Board meetings were also kept on the website proper

  241. pep.

    well https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Board is actually from 2015

  242. ralphm


  243. pep.

    I don't want to volunteer just yet, but it would indeed be nice to cleanup all that

  244. emus

    Jeybe: https://xmpp.org/2020/06/newsletter/ 🎉

  245. Kev

    FWIW, I think for the duration of my contiguous stint as Council Chair, the Chair just wrote the minutes. Unless I wildly misremember it wasn't until subsequent Chairs of Council that it became trendy for Council not to have to produce its own minutes.

  246. Kev

    (It didn't seem to be adding enough value for me to note that during the meeting, but just about enough to leave it as a footnote)

  247. ralphm

    I didn't remember, thanks

  248. Jeybe

    Thanks emus

  249. Kev

    I think there is actually a benefit (and I seem to be the only person who's ever believed this) of the chair doing the minutes, because it ensures that the meeting proceeds in a path that ensures the person writing the minutes believes they have understood actions.

  250. emus

    Kev: But it could be agreed on a structure or path?

  251. Kev

    I don't understand the question.

  252. emus

    And that something could be summarized wrongly is always a risk, I think. Actually was a suggestion

  253. emus

    It could be agreed on a structure or path

  254. pep.

    Sorry I also don't understand

  255. pep.

    "something could be summarized wrongly is always a risk" surely. That's a question that can come aftewards though (as in ACK-ing minutes etc.)

  256. pep.

    Or just replying to the miuntes email

  257. Kev

    As pep. says, the person writing the minutes may always misunderstand. The bonus to the chair doing it is that the meeting progresses in a way that the person writing the minutes at least believes they understand.

  258. Kev

    Rather than someone trying to write minutes from the logs aftewards, or even during, and not being able to follow the discussion, or probably influence the flow until it's too late.

  259. Kev

    Anyway. I am not saying that Chairs doing minutes is the only sensible thing to do. Just noting that it does (to my mind) have *some* advantage.

  260. emus

    Kev: Ah okay, now I understand the diffence

  261. Kev

    For the closest thing to these meetings that I do at work, we cycle through people doing the minutes, and the person doing the minutes essentially chairs the meeting.

  262. Kev

    Which works pretty well (although I realise cycling Board Chairs every week may be a wee bit impractical!).

  263. emus

    I think is a good service to the members to have a summary. Another way would be to lets rotate the meetings minutes and review by the chair. so quality is ensured

  264. emus

    I think is a good service to the members to have a summary. Another way would be to rotate the meetings minutes authors and review by the chair. so quality is ensured

  265. emus

    Also minutes are a "closed" document, a chat log is more or less not in my view

  266. pep.

    Affiliation changes for offline users are not reported by the component?

  267. pep.

    /broadcasted, to all participants

  268. lovetox

    pep., If the user is not in the room, the service MAY send a message from the room itself to the room occupants,

  269. lovetox

    affiliation changes are broadcasted via presence, there can be no presence when the user is not in the room

  270. lovetox

    but the MUC can use a message

  271. Zash

    Well teeeechnically there can

  272. Zash

    What prevents us from sending unavailable presence with affilation changes?

  273. lovetox

    of course but it would be weird

  274. jonas’

    what about MUC is not weird?

  275. Zash

    what jonas’ said × 1000

  276. lovetox

    i see no benefit in doing this with presence

  277. lovetox

    message seems more appropriate in this case

  278. jonas’

    except that affiliation changes are so far only in presence, so why move them to message?

  279. jonas’

    (except, I think, in cases where your *own* affiliation changes while out of the room)

  280. pep.

    What would be an argument in favour of message? Does that need to be persisted or sth? I'm already requesting affiliations when joining a MUC

  281. pep.

    (well, would be)

  282. Zash

    I mean to those in the room

  283. pep.

    Zash, yeah

  284. Zash

    If you're not in the room you can get a message, which is a thing already

  285. pep.

    You probably care a bit less though if you're not in it?

  286. Zash

    Maybe you care about your own affiliation changes

  287. pep.

    Maybe you do indeed :x

  288. lovetox

    pep. of course the message should be persisted

  289. pep.

    lovetox, it's already persisted somewhere in the MUC state and there's a way to retrieve it

  290. Zash

    Hah, can't find that part right now, but instead I found something about sending an invite if you make someone member

  291. lovetox

    what is your goal exactly?

  292. lovetox

    there is a way to broadcast affil change of offline users

  293. pep.

    I'm not planning to change anything, just curious. And then it triggered this discussion :p

  294. pep.

    I banned someone who went offline and I wondered why poezio didn't show anything (and if anybody else would see anything)

  295. eevvoor

    Where are the votes for Q2 published. Too blind to find it ...

  296. pep.

    re poezio I could do it since I'm the actor but generally we display things coming from the MUC so we'd just display this if it were a thing

  297. pep.

    eevvoor, https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Meeting-Minutes-2020-06-02

  298. pep.

    I found that in an email on list, wiki search wasn't happy for some reason

  299. eevvoor

    yeah I tried wiki search today without success

  300. eevvoor

    But forgot that I could check my mails :D.