JeybeThis months newsletter on the XMPP Blog is broken. https://xmpp.org/2020/06/newsletter/ returns 404 not found.
ZashKnown issue, waiting for a fix.
JeybeAlso, 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
ZashThe real URL is https://xmpp.org/2020/06/newsletter-09-june/
Zashat least currently
emusJeybe: Thanks for reporting, Im fixing this later
edhelasemus can you please check the Atom validity of the feed as well ?
jonas’what does a stream reset look like in XMPP over WebSockets?
jonas’do I just send <open/> again?
GuusBoard meeting time
ralphm0. Welcome + Agenda
ralphmAny comments on the agenda?
pep.None from me
MattJNone from me
pep.I apologize I still haven't provided minutes for two weeks ago.. :/
GuusNo agenda items from me
SeveSame as the rest :)
ralphm1. Minute taker
pep.I think one of the agenda item is appropriate here
ralphmI saw a discussion item on this, suggesting cycling
ralphmI am in favor, but want to submit that chairing and keeping minutes is far from ideal.
ralphmany other opinions?
GuusWhy keep minutes?
Guuswe have a written record
SeveWe have the logs though?
Guuswhat we keep so far is incomplete, at best.
Zashminutes := agenda + decisions
KevI 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 :)
pep.ralphm, when you're not here it happens often that I chair and send minutes
pep.I do it after the fact and there's that
SeveMany times you need to go to the actual record to understand the context
ralphmI 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.
SeveWe all want minutes but nobody steps up
Guussure - 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.
Guusso, their value appears negligible to me
pep.Guus, as you said it last week there is no round of verification because there is no regular minutes
SeveThe one thing we could try is a bot as MattJ mentioned
pep.(so the other way around)
MattJYes, I still think a bot is the answer
pep.Seve, we need an intermediary solution
ralphmI don't agree, and if we can't get this basic stuff down, one might wonder if holding meetings is useful
pep.What happens during the time we don't have one
MattJThe status quo is the intermediary solution
pep.The status quo is crap. I don't like compiling minutes and yet I do it because nobody else wants.
ZashThe pro-tip I've heard is to write the minutes beforehand, then use that as agenda.
pep.I do think minutes are important as ralphm says
pep.Great interest I see :)
ralphmI 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.
ralphm(pep. took some time to type :-D )
jonas’do I see this correctly that you’re nearly half into your meeting and need a minute taker?
jonas’1. you should change channels to council@
pep.(yeah sorry I wasn't showing chatstates)
jonas’2. I’ll do it this time
ralphmjonas’, actually we're discussing the persistent lack of minute takers as an agenda item, but yeah
pep.jonas’, that doesn't solve the question
jonas’I didn’t see the start of the agendum
jonas’if you already have a minute taker I’m going to wander off
ralphmjonas’, no please
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 ;)
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 ;))
ralphmjonas’, we're still at 1.
jonas’so here, I volunteer :)
pep.Now maybe we can start the discussion re minutes :p
ralphmIf nothing else, I'll send a mail to our Membership about this, asking for someone that can do this weekly.
jonas’infers ## 2. General Lack of Minute Takers
pep.And if nobody volunteers? We want automation, great, but in the meantime I think we need to get our hands dirty
ralphm2. Lack of minute takes (<= retroactively)
pep.(and by "we" I mean all of board, not just one of board)
ralphmI motion that lacking a volunteer, we round robin alphabetically by first name.
emuspep.: do you need help with the minutes?
pep.emus, "I" don't, board does
ralphmemus, we are looking for a permanent solution for someone taking and sending minutes every Board meeting
pep.ralphm, what to do in case somebody is absent
jonas’what we do at work is to continue the rotation and let them catch up next time
pep.(it's a common use-case)
jonas’what we do at work is to continue the rotation and let them do it next time.
ralphmpep., do we really need to go through exceptions already?
pep.I'd say that's the default
emusI think rotation is a good thing too
ralphm+1, by the way
pep.I'm +1 regarding the motion otherwise
MattJ+1 until we have a better solution
ralphmMotion carries, barely.
SevePrefer to use our efforts on the bot instead
SevePrefer to put our efforts on the bot instead
pep.Seve, I think you're missing the point
pep.Yes we also want a bot
ralphmI'm ok with somebody working on a bot to assist assembling minutes, but that's just a tool IMO
MattJIf I have it ready by next week this was mostly a pointless discussion...
pep.Now we don't even have a clue of who's taking care of that
jonas’(someone who likes python could take the councilbot I started and extend it where necessary)
ralphm3. Send board agenda to the list
jonas’(what is this item about?)
pep.It was mentioned 2 weeks(?) ago, that being able to prepare for these meetings would be helpful. Just like council does
jonas’(thanks, that’ll do)
ralphmIf 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.
ralphm4. Communications Person
ralphmdo we have an update here?
pep.I think the matter surfaced when somebody couldn't access trello.
pep.(And I agree with that anyway)
pep.No update for 4.
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.
ralphmpep. regarding trello, that board doesn't require login, it is public.
ralphmjonas’, good point
pep.ralphm, it's not "public" in countries where trello is not allowing access from :)
ralphmpep., wow, that's the first I hear about it
Guuscan we move on?
pep.None from me
emusif the bot can do it, we should rotate till the bot is done
emusjust my 2ct
Guushttps://xmpp.work happened. JC was wondering if/how we want to link that from xmpp.org, and who gets to decide on that.
ralphmDo we host that?
pep.on "linking that from xmpp.org" or "on xmpp.work"?
emusI intented to make some suggestions to the xsf website, this linking aswell
GuusWe do not host that, as far as I know.
MattJWe don't host it, JC does, and requested that we simply link to it
ralphmI'm happy for us linking to it. I suggest we ask the comms team to make that happen.
SeveIf the XSF links to it, the XSF has to manage it
SeveIf the XSF link to it, the XSF has to manage it
pep.I agree with Seve here
SeveIf the XSF links to it, the XSF has to manage it
GuusI don't think that's true
pep.(on this specific matter)
ralphmI don't agree we need to manage it
Guuswe're also linking to other stuff that we're not managing.
MattJxmpp.org links to lots of things the XSF doesn't manage
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.
SeveMotion carries then :)
pep.I agre with Seve that we need to manage xmpp.work
pep.Or at least that we can moderate what goes in
MattJI'm glad that a jobs board for XMPP now exists, and it's maintained by a trusted community member
MattJI'm more than happy to link to it, because we've needed this for a long time
ralphmIf 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.
SeveMe too, hope I can get a job soon on XMPP!
Guuswhat are the arguments for XSF needing to manage such a list
Guuswhat are the arguments for XSF needing to manage such a list?
pep.Moderation would be one
SeveGuus, that was supposed to help the XSF
SeveI proposed the job to help gather sponsors and the like
GuusI don't think so. This is supposed to help the XMPP ecosystem
Guus(not the XSF)
SeveThe way you guys want to do it, does not allow for that
ralphmIn 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.
GuusI don't see a reason why the XSF should need to moderate that list
GuusI do hope that it is moderated - but I don't think the XSF is required to be involved in the moderation process.
Danieljust be happy that someone stepped up to acutally create it? - if it turns into a mess you can always remove it again
ralphmAgreed, 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.
SeveThen I don't see why is an issue for discussion for the XSF?
jonas’linking on the websiet is
jonas’linking on the website is
pep.it's commteam's job
jonas’so nothing to decide here (/me looks at the clock)
jonas’so nothing to decide here (/me looks at the clock)?
ralphmSeve: 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.
Severalphm, my idea was to support the job and provide sponsors with highlighted/featured jobs, promote them ,etc
ralphmI motion we ask our comms team to link to the jobs board at https://xmpp.work/
MattJSeve, I like that idea, and perhaps we can still make it happen
ralphmSeve: that's a great idea. We can discuss that separately with JC.
MattJBut not necessary for just getting something live
pep.I wish I could say on-list.
GuusLet's use what we have now - instead of wait for something to materialize that hasn't done so for ages.
ralphmpep., you can, if you want
ralphmHowever, it seems the motion carries.
jonas’oh, Board has different rules?
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.
Seve(support the job board*)
pep.jonas’, no veto, majority of quorum to pass
pep.And afaik I have never seen a vote pass on to list :x
ralphmjonas’, indeed the Council's way of voting also includes terms and stuff, we haven't done that as far as I know
jonas’ralphm, ah, TIL
jonas’not important for this meeting though, I trust you as chair to not lie :)
jonas’not important for this meeting though, I trust you as chair (and everyone on Board, actually) to not lie about or fudge votes :)
ralphmI see 3x +1, 1x -1, and a not-yet-vote. I'd prefer to tell comms team to go ahead.
ralphmpep., could your concern be treated orthogonally?
pep.Well if motion carries it carries. It's just that I don't have a clear enough opinion to vote yet
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
ralphmI'll take that as a 0. Motion carries.
ralphm6. Date of Next
pep.(which is different from 0, IMO)
ralphmpep., noted, I'll retract that
MattJ...thanks :) (especially to jonas’)
pep.And thanks jonas’, and others who come chime in :)
emusAnd thanks to jcbrand to getting that up
jonas’minutes go to members@ and what else?
ralphmOh, and decisions go on our wiki
pep.(that does need updating..)
ralphmpep., yeah, I was looking for them :/
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
ralphmthere's no overview page either. Possibly it'd be better to have a page per Board term.
ralphmI do indeed think that a bot would be helpful for this.
pep.There are older board pages also
ralphmyeah, at one point, Board meetings were also kept on the website proper
pep.well https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Board is actually from 2015
pep.I don't want to volunteer just yet, but it would indeed be nice to cleanup all that
emusJeybe: https://xmpp.org/2020/06/newsletter/ 🎉
KevFWIW, 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.
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)
ralphmI didn't remember, thanks
KevI 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.
emusKev: But it could be agreed on a structure or path?
KevI don't understand the question.
emusAnd that something could be summarized wrongly is always a risk, I think.
Actually was a suggestion
emusIt could be agreed on a structure or path
pep.Sorry I also don't understand
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.)
pep.Or just replying to the miuntes email
KevAs 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.
KevRather 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.
KevAnyway. 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.
emusKev: Ah okay, now I understand the diffence
KevFor 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.
KevWhich works pretty well (although I realise cycling Board Chairs every week may be a wee bit impractical!).
emusI 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
emusI 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
emusAlso minutes are a "closed" document, a chat log is more or less not in my view
Steve Killehas left
Steve Killehas joined
pep.Affiliation changes for offline users are not reported by the component?
pep./broadcasted, to all participants
lovetoxpep., If the user is not in the room, the service MAY send a message from the room itself to the room occupants,
lovetoxaffiliation changes are broadcasted via presence, there can be no presence when the user is not in the room
lovetoxbut the MUC can use a message
ZashWell teeeechnically there can
ZashWhat prevents us from sending unavailable presence with affilation changes?
lovetoxof course but it would be weird
jonas’what about MUC is not weird?
Zashwhat jonas’ said × 1000
lovetoxi see no benefit in doing this with presence
lovetoxmessage seems more appropriate in this case
jonas’except that affiliation changes are so far only in presence, so why move them to message?
jonas’(except, I think, in cases where your *own* affiliation changes while out of the room)
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
pep.(well, would be)
ZashI mean to those in the room
ZashIf you're not in the room you can get a message, which is a thing already
pep.You probably care a bit less though if you're not in it?
ZashMaybe you care about your own affiliation changes
pep.Maybe you do indeed :x
lovetoxpep. of course the message should be persisted
pep.lovetox, it's already persisted somewhere in the MUC state and there's a way to retrieve it
ZashHah, can't find that part right now, but instead I found something about sending an invite if you make someone member
lovetoxwhat is your goal exactly?
lovetoxthere is a way to broadcast affil change of offline users
pep.I'm not planning to change anything, just curious. And then it triggered this discussion :p
pep.I banned someone who went offline and I wondered why poezio didn't show anything (and if anybody else would see anything)
eevvoorWhere are the votes for Q2 published. Too blind to find it ...
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