XSF Discussion - 2020-06-11

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

Known issue, waiting for a fix.

Ok, nice

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

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

at least currently

Jeybe: Thanks for reporting, Im fixing this later

Perfect

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

https://validator.w3.org/feed/check.cgi?url=https%3A%2F%2Fxmpp.org%2Ffeeds%2Fall.atom.xml

hmm, I actually have no clue on this? 😩️

can you ask the the CommTeam muc?

But thanks for your feedback!

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

do I just send <open/> again?

Probably

Board meeting time

0. Welcome + Agenda

Hi!

o/

pep., ?

!

Any comments on the agenda?

None from me

None from me

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

No agenda items from me

Same as the rest :)

1. Minute taker

I think one of the agenda item is appropriate here

I saw a discussion item on this, suggesting cycling

this

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

any other opinions?

Why keep minutes?

we have a written record

We have the logs though?

That

logs!=minutes

what we keep so far is incomplete, at best.

minutes := agenda + decisions roughly

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 :)

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

I do it after the fact and there's that

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

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.

We all want minutes but nobody steps up

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.

so, their value appears negligible to me

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

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

(so the other way around)

Yes, I still think a bot is the answer

Seve, we need an intermediary solution

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

What happens during the time we don't have one

The status quo is the intermediary solution

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

I agree

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

I do think minutes are important as ralphm says

Great interest I see :)

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.

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

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

As usual

1. you should change channels to council@

(yeah sorry I wasn't showing chatstates)

2. I’ll do it this time

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

jonas’, that doesn't solve the question

I didn’t see the start of the agendum

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

jonas’, no please

(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’, we're still at 1.

so here, I volunteer :)

thanks

Now maybe we can start the discussion re minutes :p

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

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

2. Lack of minute takes (<= retroactively)

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

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

pep.: do you need help with the minutes?

emus, "I" don't, board does

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

ralphm, what to do in case somebody is absent

(it's a common use-case)

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

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

I'd say that's the default

I think rotation is a good thing too

But ok

+1, by the way

I'm +1 regarding the motion otherwise

0

+1 until we have a better solution

0

Motion carries, barely.

Prefer to put our efforts on the bot instead ✏

Seve, I think you're missing the point

Yes we also want a bot

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

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

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

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

3. Send board agenda to the list

pep?

Sure

(what is this item about?)

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

(thanks, that’ll do) ✏

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.

4. Communications Person

do we have an update here?

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

(And I agree with that anyway)

No update for 4.

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.

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

jonas’, good point

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

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

can we move on?

yes

5. AOB

None from me

None

wait

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

just my 2ct

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

Do we host that?

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

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

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

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

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

I agree with Seve here

I don’t

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

I don't think that's true

(on this specific matter)

I don't agree we need to manage it

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

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

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.

Motion carries then :)

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

Or at least that we can moderate what goes in

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

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

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.

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

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

Moderation would be one

Guus, that was supposed to help the XSF

I proposed the job to help gather sponsors and the like

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

(not the XSF)

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

sure

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.

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

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

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

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.

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

linking on the website is ✏

it's commteam's job

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

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.

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

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

+1

+1

+1

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

-1

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

But not necessary for just getting something live

I wish I could say on-list.

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

pep., you can, if you want

However, it seems the motion carries.

oh, Board has different rules?

> 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.

(support the job board*)

jonas’, no veto, majority of quorum to pass

ok

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

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

ralphm, ah, TIL

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

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

pep., could your concern be treated orthogonally?

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

> 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

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

6. Date of Next

+1W

(which is different from 0, IMO)

pep., noted, I'll retract that

7. Close

Thanks all!

Thanks

👍

...thanks :) (especially to jonas’)

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

indeed

And thanks to jcbrand to getting that up

minutes go to members@ and what else?

that's it

Oh, and decisions go on our wiki

(that does need updating..)

sent

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

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

https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Category:Board

pep., agreed

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

might be

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

There are older board pages also

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

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

yeah

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

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

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.

(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)

I didn't remember, thanks

Thanks emus

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.

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

I don't understand the question.

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

It could be agreed on a structure or path

Sorry I also don't understand

"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.)

Or just replying to the miuntes email

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.

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.

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.

Kev: Ah okay, now I understand the diffence

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.

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

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 ✏

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

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

/broadcasted, to all participants

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

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

but the MUC can use a message

Well teeeechnically there can

What prevents us from sending unavailable presence with affilation changes?

of course but it would be weird

what about MUC is not weird?

what jonas’ said × 1000

i see no benefit in doing this with presence

message seems more appropriate in this case

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

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

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

(well, would be)

I mean to those in the room

Zash, yeah

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

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

Maybe you care about your own affiliation changes

Maybe you do indeed :x

pep. of course the message should be persisted

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

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

what is your goal exactly?

there is a way to broadcast affil change of offline users

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

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

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

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

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

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

yeah I tried wiki search today without success

But forgot that I could check my mails :D.