If you are an author and you care about your implementation being listed, making a yearly reminder is not a very large hurdle.
thorstenhas joined
intosihas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
intosihas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
Maranda
Ge0rG: "shit happens" and yearly reminders are easy on failure
Ge0rG
Maranda: make a cronjob that will `echo "renew xmpp implementation list"` and there is your yearly reminder email
adiaholichas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
Ge0rG
Maranda: also we don't even know who the authors are
Maranda
That's a bullshit and you know it, the most, you don't have a mail contact field in the data
paulhas left
Ge0rG
Maranda: so do you have a better idea of proxy measuring whether the author is still interested in xmpp, that has the minimum of additional work burden on the XSF web team?
mukt2has left
Danielhas left
intosihas left
Maranda
Ge0rG no I measure, that courtesy is a good thing, and that the author like myself may simply forget he has to renew the entry every year while caring about the project. So sending a mail out when an entry is phased out is not a bad thing and makes the whole organization looks less like it is run by a bunch of assholes to be frank.
Maranda
That's my thought
Danielhas joined
Ge0rG
Maranda: this was also discussed before, and IMVHO, an author that hardly cares about the XSF would be likely to use such a reminder email to renew their listing, even if otherwise not doing anything to keep up with the progress of xmpp.
Ge0rG
So requiring the author to care a little bit on their own is not so much asked after all.
intosihas joined
goffihas joined
Ge0rG
Also this listing is not for your ego, it's for the users looking for viable implementations. That might better explain the process.
mukt2has joined
j.rhas left
adiaholichas joined
lovetoxhas left
lovetoxhas joined
j.rhas joined
mdosch
But it seems to not work as intended as we recently saw that a lot of active projects were not listed anymore while projects like pidgin were.
Vaulorhas left
Sevehas left
undefinedhas left
undefinedhas joined
Vaulorhas joined
florettahas joined
Sevehas joined
adiaholichas left
andrey.ghas joined
undefinedhas left
emushas joined
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
jcbrandhas joined
andrey.ghas left
lorddavidiiihas left
Maranda
Ge0rG: again that's BS, who said anything about ego and what makes you presume I don't care? I even probably had a reminder somewhere, but, this year I just basically moved the whole infrastructure to new VMs/Hardware and Software and I won't mention the other burden starting with a "C". So you'll excuse me if _the reminder_ got lost in the various transitions.
Maranda
All to say *shit may happen* as Martin implies, and this is the kind of absurd, wrong elitarian attitudes that causes people to scorn on the XSF. ✎
Maranda
All to say *shit may happen* as mdosch implies, and this is the kind of absurd, wrong elitarian attitudes that causes people to scorn on the XSF. ✏
werdanhas joined
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
werdanhas left
karoshihas joined
adiaholichas joined
APachhas left
APachhas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
mukt2has left
lovetoxhas left
intosihas left
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
amuza@riseup.nethas left
amuza@riseup.nethas joined
jonas’
Maranda, it’s not about you, it’s about pidgin et al. ;)
jonas’
but what mdosch says is indeed relevant
mukt2has joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
intosihas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
lorddavidiiihas joined
adiaholichas left
Ge0rG
Maranda: so your argument is, a reminder that you set yourself will get lost, whereas an email reminder from some random machine on the internet won't?
undefinedhas joined
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
lovetoxhas joined
adiaholichas left
intosihas left
sonnyhas left
intosihas joined
sonnyhas joined
mimi89999has left
undefinedhas left
krauqhas left
Maranda
No not at all, I think I spoke clearly. I said that if you phase out a software from the page you could at least pay the courtesy to inform the author. There could be many reasons as of why the entry wasn't renewed, mine did expire in July and while I follow the XSF activity, I found out just now
krauqhas joined
jcbrandhas left
jcbrandhas joined
Maranda
It's maybe just me but I find that phasing out without even a word, is quite rude. And since you do send "reminders" in the case of quarterly membership renewals I don't see why you couldn't act similarly
intosihas left
sonnyhas left
vanitasvitaehas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
goffihas left
Holger
FWIW I don't get the downside of email reminders either. Specifically when it's not about the software author's ego but about the XSF's interest in providing a sane list (i.e., we want something from software authors, not vice versa).
Holger
> a reminder that you set yourself will get lost, whereas an email reminder from some random machine on the internet won't?
Maintainers might forget to set a reminder, or it might break for some other reason.
The idea seems to be that we only want to list software where maintainers care enough to be listed. Whereas I would've thought the goal is to list software that's maintained.
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
lovetox
also we are always talking about maintainers, but everyone could do the update or not?
lovetox
for example im maintainer for some years now, but i dont remember doing an update ever
lovetox
so someone did that for me it seems
Holger
Yes that's how I understood it.
Maranda
So basically it goes on popularity? Even?
adiaholichas joined
sonnyhas joined
wurstsalat
I did that for Gajim. but commit history reveals Ge0rG did it for lovetox as well :)
Guus
I don't have an issue with anyone submitting a renewal, but this was specifically rejected a couple of months ago. We require a verifiable maintainer of the project to request the renewal.
Holger
Ah.
Guus
Will need to dig into chat archives / meeting minutes to find the specifics.
intosihas joined
adiaholichas left
lovetox
nice, it would totally work if Ge0rG does it for me though, i dont need a reminder then
lovetox
🤣️
Guus
I don't expect we will ever find a mechanism that will 100% satisfy everyone. I do believe that what we have now is an improvement over what we had before.
Guus
We can obviously tweak and adjust as we learn the effects of what we now have in place.
Maranda
As the reminder it could even go in the form of a message on (one of) the (mostly dead now) mailing lists thrice a year, I don't see that as much the "additional work burden" for the web team Ge0rG talked about imho
Guus
However, what we have now is the result of quite some work and a lot of discussion. Dismissing it offhand as "bullshit" is to easy.
Holger
Dismissing a possibly valid argument by reducing it to the b* word kinda sounds easy as well 😛️
debaclehas joined
undefinedhas joined
Holger
And as far as I'm concerned I can always relate to something not being done due to missing manpower. I just didn't quite get the "it's the maintainer's responsibility to be listed; not our problem" stance.
lovetox
and in the past discussion it was decided that the goal was to actively *not* remember people about the update?
lovetox
like its intended to be a little challenge for maintainers?
lovetox
sounds weird, when i remember this correctly it was just so dead projects dont get listed anymore
lovetox
so a maintainer coming in and doing the work is ok and i think nobody challenges that
Maranda
Guus: the BS were the arguments used to counter my own and... actually *dismiss 'em* tbh. Beside I'm the one who pointed the issue..?
lovetox
its the "But we dont remember you about it" thats weird
Guus
I've not made my mind up either way. I do wonder if sending out reminders defeats the purpose of this mechanism, which is to purge the list of crappy entries.
lovetox
Guus, i dont think thats a stance the XSF can take
lovetox
whats crappy and whats not
lovetox
as the software site explicitly says, that the software is not tested on compliance or anything else
sonnyhas left
Guus
Hence the renewal mechanism lovetox
lovetox
so XSF intention is not to list "good" software whatever that means
sonnyhas joined
lovetox
the intention is to list "active developed" software
Guus
It was assumed that by requiring maintainers to renew, we'd weed out the old, unmaintained, crappy listings
lovetox
yeah and i think thats still not wrong
Maranda
Guus again it's just 3 mails a year, nothing differs. Beside a better attitude torward the developers by the XSF
Guus
Remembering them to renew might defeat that purpose, unsure.
Maranda
That's all
lovetox
but i dont see how a once a year email to remember people to update would counter that?
Guus
I have no strong feelings either way.
lskdjfhas joined
etahas left
etahas joined
Daniel
For me the incentives of being on that list aren't big enough to go through the troubles of renewing
Daniel
The xsf probably benefits more from listing Conversations than I benefit from the traffic
Guus
That's why I don't like the requirement of needing a maintainer of the project to do the listing
Daniel
(judging from the number of clicks that github tracks as coming from that site)
sonnyhas left
intosihas left
Guus
I think that you have a valid point Daniel .
intosihas joined
Guus
I do hope that in your role as an XSF member there's more of an incentive for you to have Conversations listed, Daniel 😁
Daniel
Yes. Luckily someone did it for me this time.
Guus
I need to go, family commitments. If we want reminders, let's involve web team/iteam.
Ge0rG
Daniel: there are people who think that it's good to have pidgin listed there, and I'm very strongly convinced that listing it is harmful to the xsf
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
Ge0rG
Popularity is a horrible proxy.
Maranda
Indeed, beside if you let anyone do the update it may go against the will of the mantainer in the case he/she doesn't want to be on that list ✎
mimi89999has joined
Maranda
Indeed, beside if you let anyone do the update it may go against the will of the mantainer in the case he/she doesn't want his/her work to be on that list ✏
Ge0rG
Everything will be much better once we have compliance badges
eta
Ge0rG: why not rank clients by how conformant to the compliance suites they are?
Nano4BeingYouhas joined
Guus
Let's not put an insane amount of effort into this. The list will never be 100% up to everyone's liking anyway. What we have now is a massive improvement over what we had. Let's just call that a win.
pep.
Maybe it's time.to.put on the table getting rid of these lists✎
pep.
Maybe it's time to put on the table getting rid of these lists ✏
krauqhas left
sonnyhas joined
adiaholichas joined
intosihas left
Guus
There's something to be said for that. It feels kind of awkward that the XSF apparently feels tie the need to publish lists like this. As a protocol with a very mature ecosystem, that perhaps isn't needed?
Guus
I really am off now though.
adiaholichas left
sonnyhas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
krauqhas joined
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
Ge0rG
eta: that's a great idea.,but how do we get the required data?
adiaholichas joined
intosihas joined
Steve Killehas left
sonnyhas joined
werdanhas joined
werdanhas left
Mikaelahas left
Mikaelahas joined
intosihas left
florettahas left
undefinedhas left
Sevehas left
Vaulorhas left
undefinedhas joined
florettahas joined
Sevehas joined
Vaulorhas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
intosihas joined
sonnyhas left
undefinedhas left
adiaholichas left
undefinedhas joined
adiaholichas joined
eevvoorhas joined
sonnyhas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
intosihas left
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
alameyohas left
adiaholichas left
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
wurstsalat
Ge0rG, I guess we’d need infrastructure anyway if we plan to make use of DOAP processing (automatic client badges for the list, listing example implementations in xeps, rendering supported xep tables for clients, ..)
Ge0rG
wurstsalat: yes, that's important but also complex work that's looking for a volunteer.
sonnyhas left
wurstsalat
right
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
etahas left
etahas joined
Guus
There will be questionable claims of features from projects if having those features listed gets them a better position.
adiaholichas joined
alameyohas joined
Ge0rG
Guus: well, we can't prevent people from lying, and it will be a very interesting exercise in xsf neutrality once that happens and is contested. But given the developer interest for the xsf lists, I don't consider that attack vector as very likely
wurstsalat
Guus, sure, but I guess there is no technological solution to that
sonnyhas joined
intosihas joined
Ge0rG
I've already thought about how to sort such a list. CS year first, advanced / core second, category third?
Ge0rG
There really is no "right" sorting order for a three dimensional data set
sonnyhas left
Ge0rG
yaxim is 2020 Core IM, Advanced Mobile. What would dictate the sorting priority?
Ge0rG
Maybe just listing the supported badges is just enough?
Ge0rG
(this is also why I used the colors to indicate if the year is current or not on my badge prototype)
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
wurstsalat
Ge0rG, make the table sortable (like the xeps table)
neshtaxmpphas left
Ge0rG
wurstsalat: sortable by what?
neshtaxmpphas joined
undefinedhas left
sonnyhas joined
wurstsalat
Year and Core/Advanced + filter for mobile/IM ?
LNJhas joined
Ge0rG
So by all three dimensions? Separately?
jcbrandhas left
intosihas left
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
mukt2has left
intosihas joined
eevvoorhas left
wurstsalat
I think 'Year' would be the important one. if you’re looking for mobile clients, you probably want to filter by Mobile category and then have a list of 2020;Mobile (Basic/Advanced)
eevvoorhas joined
paulhas joined
eevvoorhas left
sonnyhas joined
Shellhas left
Ge0rG
So we need filters in addition to sorting?
Ge0rG
Maybe we are overdoing it now
Ge0rG
Or maybe we first need to fix the tooling to actually support fetching DOAP
wurstsalat
Ge0rG, sure, without the tooling we’re just bike-shedding :) but the xep list has filters as well, so we might have a look there
eevvoorhas joined
intosihas left
Ge0rG
wurstsalat: you just volunteered?
intosihas joined
eevvoorhas left
wurstsalat
I volunteered several times, but working on the website is a pain at the moment
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
eevvoorhas joined
sonnyhas left
Guus
I'd rather keep it all a lot simpler. What we have now, with some tweaks maybe, or complete removal of the listing. Most other options won't improve things dramatically, while take a lot of effort to create and maintain.
Ge0rG
Guus: I see the value in listing supporting (open source) implementations in the XEPs from DOAP data, and the additional win of compliance data in the listing would actually improve the overall situation.
eevvoorhas left
Ge0rG
Also I'd be okay with listing pidgin, if it comes with a "Core IM Client 2006" badge