Ge0rGIf 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
MarandaGe0rG: "shit happens" and yearly reminders are easy on failure
Ge0rGMaranda: make a cronjob that will `echo "renew xmpp implementation list"` and there is your yearly reminder email
adiaholichas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
Ge0rGMaranda: also we don't even know who the authors are
MarandaThat's a bullshit and you know it, the most, you don't have a mail contact field in the data
paulhas left
Ge0rGMaranda: 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
MarandaGe0rG 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.
MarandaThat's my thought
Danielhas joined
Ge0rGMaranda: 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.
Ge0rGSo requiring the author to care a little bit on their own is not so much asked after all.
intosihas joined
goffihas joined
Ge0rGAlso 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
mdoschBut 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
MarandaGe0rG: 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.
MarandaAll 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.
MarandaAll 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
Ge0rGMaranda: 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
MarandaNo 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
MarandaIt'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
HolgerFWIW 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
lovetoxalso we are always talking about maintainers, but everyone could do the update or not?
lovetoxfor example im maintainer for some years now, but i dont remember doing an update ever
lovetoxso someone did that for me it seems
HolgerYes that's how I understood it.
MarandaSo basically it goes on popularity? Even?
adiaholichas joined
sonnyhas joined
wurstsalatI did that for Gajim. but commit history reveals Ge0rG did it for lovetox as well :)
GuusI 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.
HolgerAh.
GuusWill need to dig into chat archives / meeting minutes to find the specifics.
intosihas joined
adiaholichas left
lovetoxnice, it would totally work if Ge0rG does it for me though, i dont need a reminder then
lovetox🤣️
GuusI 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.
GuusWe can obviously tweak and adjust as we learn the effects of what we now have in place.
MarandaAs 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
GuusHowever, what we have now is the result of quite some work and a lot of discussion. Dismissing it offhand as "bullshit" is to easy.
HolgerDismissing a possibly valid argument by reducing it to the b* word kinda sounds easy as well 😛️
debaclehas joined
undefinedhas joined
HolgerAnd 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.
lovetoxand in the past discussion it was decided that the goal was to actively *not* remember people about the update?
lovetoxlike its intended to be a little challenge for maintainers?
lovetoxsounds weird, when i remember this correctly it was just so dead projects dont get listed anymore
lovetoxso a maintainer coming in and doing the work is ok and i think nobody challenges that
MarandaGuus: the BS were the arguments used to counter my own and... actually *dismiss 'em* tbh. Beside I'm the one who pointed the issue..?
lovetoxits the "But we dont remember you about it" thats weird
GuusI'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.
lovetoxGuus, i dont think thats a stance the XSF can take
lovetoxwhats crappy and whats not
lovetoxas the software site explicitly says, that the software is not tested on compliance or anything else
sonnyhas left
GuusHence the renewal mechanism lovetox
lovetoxso XSF intention is not to list "good" software whatever that means
sonnyhas joined
lovetoxthe intention is to list "active developed" software
GuusIt was assumed that by requiring maintainers to renew, we'd weed out the old, unmaintained, crappy listings
lovetoxyeah and i think thats still not wrong
MarandaGuus again it's just 3 mails a year, nothing differs. Beside a better attitude torward the developers by the XSF
GuusRemembering them to renew might defeat that purpose, unsure.
MarandaThat's all
lovetoxbut i dont see how a once a year email to remember people to update would counter that?
GuusI have no strong feelings either way.
lskdjfhas joined
etahas left
etahas joined
DanielFor me the incentives of being on that list aren't big enough to go through the troubles of renewing
DanielThe xsf probably benefits more from listing Conversations than I benefit from the traffic
GuusThat'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
GuusI think that you have a valid point Daniel .
intosihas joined
GuusI do hope that in your role as an XSF member there's more of an incentive for you to have Conversations listed, Daniel 😁
DanielYes. Luckily someone did it for me this time.
GuusI need to go, family commitments. If we want reminders, let's involve web team/iteam.
Ge0rGDaniel: 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
Ge0rGPopularity is a horrible proxy.
MarandaIndeed, 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
MarandaIndeed, 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
Ge0rGEverything will be much better once we have compliance badges
etaGe0rG: why not rank clients by how conformant to the compliance suites they are?
Nano4BeingYouhas joined
GuusLet'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
GuusThere'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?
GuusI really am off now though.
adiaholichas left
sonnyhas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
krauqhas joined
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
Ge0rGeta: 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
wurstsalatGe0rG, 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, ..)
Ge0rGwurstsalat: yes, that's important but also complex work that's looking for a volunteer.
sonnyhas left
wurstsalatright
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
etahas left
etahas joined
GuusThere will be questionable claims of features from projects if having those features listed gets them a better position.
adiaholichas joined
alameyohas joined
Ge0rGGuus: 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
wurstsalatGuus, sure, but I guess there is no technological solution to that
sonnyhas joined
intosihas joined
Ge0rGI've already thought about how to sort such a list. CS year first, advanced / core second, category third?
Ge0rGThere really is no "right" sorting order for a three dimensional data set
sonnyhas left
Ge0rGyaxim is 2020 Core IM, Advanced Mobile. What would dictate the sorting priority?
Ge0rGMaybe 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
wurstsalatGe0rG, make the table sortable (like the xeps table)
neshtaxmpphas left
Ge0rGwurstsalat: sortable by what?
neshtaxmpphas joined
undefinedhas left
sonnyhas joined
wurstsalatYear and Core/Advanced + filter for mobile/IM ?
LNJhas joined
Ge0rGSo 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
wurstsalatI 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
Ge0rGSo we need filters in addition to sorting?
Ge0rGMaybe we are overdoing it now
Ge0rGOr maybe we first need to fix the tooling to actually support fetching DOAP
wurstsalatGe0rG, 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
Ge0rGwurstsalat: you just volunteered?
intosihas joined
eevvoorhas left
wurstsalatI volunteered several times, but working on the website is a pain at the moment
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
eevvoorhas joined
sonnyhas left
GuusI'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.
Ge0rGGuus: 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
Ge0rGAlso I'd be okay with listing pidgin, if it comes with a "Core IM Client 2006" badge
lovetoxhas left
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
APachhas left
eevvoorhas joined
intosihas left
wurstsalatCompliance Suites are dating back to 2006 ?
intosihas joined
Ge0rGhttps://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0211.html is 2008