βHow to run a small social network site for your friendsβ
lovetoxhas left
Steve Killehas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
Steve Killehas joined
antranigvhas joined
guus.der.kinderenhas joined
eevvoorhas joined
Andrzejhas joined
mukt2has joined
lorddavidiiihas left
eevvoorhas left
Half-Shothas left
uhoreghas left
Rixon ππ¨has left
Half-Shothas joined
Rixon ππ¨has joined
uhoreghas joined
speedballhas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
mukt2has left
Andrzejhas left
lorddavidiiihas left
Andrzejhas joined
lorddavidiiihas joined
antranigvhas left
Mikaelahas left
lovetoxhas joined
stpeterhas joined
stpeterhas left
antranigvhas joined
florettahas joined
etahas left
etahas joined
mukt2has joined
eevvoorhas joined
archas joined
Yagizahas left
Yagizahas joined
mukt2has left
LNJhas joined
archas left
archas joined
werdanhas joined
werdanhas left
Steve Killehas left
Steve Killehas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
eevvoorhas left
eevvoorhas joined
Andrzejhas left
lorddavidiiihas left
Steve Killehas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
antranigvhas left
mukt2has joined
Steve Killehas joined
Steve Killehas left
Steve Killehas joined
eevvoorhas left
eevvoorhas joined
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
antranigvhas joined
sonnyhas left
eevvoorhas left
mukt2has left
Andrzejhas joined
sonnyhas joined
eevvoorhas joined
pep.
Does pubsub allow a node to be marked/tagged/namespaced to say "here that's the kind of content you'll find and how you're supposed to handle it", or is it just a non-namespaced name?
sonnyhas left
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
pep.
pubsub#type ? :/
pep.
(node configuration)
sonnyhas joined
pep.
unrelated, is it possible to have xmpp: NSs that actually point to the document?
lorddavidiiihas left
stpeterhas joined
stpeterhas left
antranigvhas left
xeckshas left
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
xeckshas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
mukt2has joined
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
mukt2has left
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
Mikaelahas joined
ralphmbangs gavel
ralphm
0. Welcome + Agenda
pep.
!
ralphm
Hi!
ralphm
I just sent the agenda, but it seems stuck somewhere.
ralphm
0) Welcome
1) Minute taker
2) txxmpp client on client list?
3) Elections
4) AOB
5) Date of Next
6) Close
ralphm
MattJ, Guus, Seve?
peetahhas left
peetahhas joined
Sevesays hello!
MattJ
Hey
guus.der.kinderen
o/
ralphm
1. Minute taker
pep.
I'll do it
ralphm
Thanks pep.
ralphm
2. txxmpp client
ralphm
From what I understand, this is a command line tool, rather than an interactive chat client.
I don't particularly see a problem with adding this, if the description just notes this point.
guus.der.kinderen
Is this a matter for board?
pep.
I also don't see any issue with that
pep.
I don't think so
ralphm
guus.der.kinderen, good question, probably not
guus.der.kinderen
We don't show descriptions of clients on the site, by the way
pep.
Even better :)
ralphm
I mean on the page linked
Seve
Guus well, it is an open PR I would like to close and I believe applying my only opinion is not fair. Because I would not have accepted the PR at this moment, because I personally feel it does not fit there.
guus.der.kinderen
I'm with you on that Seve,
pep.
Seve, what do you think fits there then?
guus.der.kinderen
The page linked is source code
guus.der.kinderen
there's no documentation.
guus.der.kinderen
I'd stick it with 'libraries'rather then 'clients' to not confuse 99% of the people on our website looking at that list
pep.
Is all this stuff referenced somewhere in our criteria? (do we have any public criteria?)
guus.der.kinderen
but to be honest, I don't care much either way
guus.der.kinderen
No, we do not.
guus.der.kinderen
although...
pep.
Well then it probably fits into no criteria
guus.der.kinderen
there's a bit of documentation in the stuff that processes the data files, I think.
guus.der.kinderen
anyway, let's not make a big deal out of this
pep.
sure
guus.der.kinderen
Happy to see webteam move forward on this how they see fit.
ralphm
+1
guus.der.kinderen
I'd stick it with libraries, but no-one made me king of anything.
Seve
Alright then
pep.
We should really get rid of these lists someday..
pep.
Anyway..
ralphm
To replace it with something else?
pep.
nothing
pep.
Not on xmpp.org at least
lorddavidiiihas left
ralphm
Well, ok. That might be an interesting topic some other time, venue.
pep.
Yep
ralphm
3. Elections
ralphm
As you've seen Alex has put out the call for our upcoming Board and Council elections.
ralphm
Submission deadline is November 8.
ralphm
Please consider who you'd like to ping to serve on Board and/or if you want to stand (again) yourself.
sonnyhas joined
ralphm
I don't have anything further on this myself.
ralphm
4. AOB
ralphm
Any OB?
Seve
None here π
pep.
None from me
lorddavidiiihas joined
guus.der.kinderen
neither
guus.der.kinderen
maybe we can review some feedback/backburner topics next meeting?
MattJ
None here
guus.der.kinderen
in an effort to clean up the plate a bit
ralphm
Yeah, I already did a bit of clean up, but there's more that may be so obsolete that it can be removed.
ralphm
If you all could have a look at Trello, that'd be great. I'll add an agenda item for this
ralphm
6. Date of Next
ralphm
+1W
ralphm
7. Close
ralphm
Thanks all!
MattJ
Thanks!
guus.der.kinderen
Cheers
ralphmbangs gavel
Seve
Super π
pep.
Thanks
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
sonnyhas left
stpeterhas joined
stpeterhas left
antranigvhas joined
pep.
jonasβ, vanitasvitae, https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0277.html#location there's already some escaping in URIs being done here btw
sonnyhas joined
lovetox
pep., "Outside of native XMPP systems"
lovetox
of course you have to escape urls if you want them to be used by other applications
pep.
Is that an issue?
sonnyhas left
lovetox
if you have not allowed chars in your uri you have to escape them
lovetox
it does not matter if it happens in the context of xmpp or whatever
lovetox
otherwise its not a valid uri
lovetox
i dont see how this has anything to do with the question if you are allowed to put an escaped uri into a node attribute
pep.
I don't think we're talking about the same thing
pep.
are we
pep.
I'm talking about this: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/983 and council's comments
pep.
Unrelated, I regret 0277 doesn't specify pubsub#type to be set to 'urn:xmpp:microblog:0' when not in PEP.. Any reason why? miss?
pep.
βA person's microblog SHOULD be located at a personal eventing (PEP) node named "urn:xmpp:microblog:0" but MAY be located at a generic publish-subscribe node that is not attached to a user's IM account.β
pep.
Would it make sense to change it now? :/
pep.
TIL microblog is not even Draft
sonnyhas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
sonnyhas left
antranigvhas left
flow
pep., sounds sensible to recommend that pubsub#type is set
antranigvhas joined
flow
or even require that. but I don't want to get into "recommend it" vs "require it" discussion right nwo✎
flow
or even require that. but I don't want to get into "recommend it" vs "require it" discussion right now ✏
pep.
I'd also require it, but I think I'm not gonna like what that implies to change in the document
flow
point is, recommending something that is sensible makes always sense, no matter the XEP state
flow
what does it imply? and what do you not like?
pep.
Well, recommending it would be better than rn, but still quite useless because it's not something I can use to detect 277 nodes in bare PubSub
sonnyhas joined
pep.
So I'd rather require it.
pep.
Now..
pep.
Requiring it certainly means breaking change
peetahhas left
peetahhas joined
flow
make a PR and put it on council's plate :)
pep.
heh
sonnyhas left
pep.
Do we have stats of what client is implementing microblog? Movim, SΓ t, anybody else? What about libraries?
pep.
Link Mauve, any idea? (with the DOAP stuff you've been playing)
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
pep.
I'd also recommend using atom:generator in 277 maybe
pep.
Even though just using pubsub#type is already a step up
lorddavidiiihas left
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
Yagizahas left
Yagizahas joined
lovetoxhas left
archas left
pep.
https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/986 !
Zash
Hm, searching for `pubsub#type` yields mostly examples and a changelog entry about clarifying the field.
pep.
Yeah I've seen that :/
pep.
"clarifying", always the same word. Though tbh it's still as loose
pep.
"payload type" doesn't mean much
Zash
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#registrar-formtypes-config has the longest description I could find
Zash
> The type of node data, usually specified by the namespace of the payload (if any)
pep.
Ok, so that looks appropriate
pep.
There are two example that have "http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" as value, but that's quite handwavy to me tbh
pep.
"Yeah it's atom, do whatever you want however you want"
pep.
Which is not exactly what 0277 is
sonnyhas joined
pep.
And even if it were "just atom on pubsub", there's no possibility of evolution when done this way (when pubsub#type is set to Atom)
sonnyhas left
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
sonnyhas joined
j.rhas left
eevvoorhas left
sonnyhas left
lovetoxhas joined
j.rhas joined
sonnyhas joined
Guushas left
Guushas joined
sonnyhas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
Wojtekhas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
guus.der.kinderenhas left
pep.
Where would it make sense to add an "Integration with Data Forms" section in 0060? Similar to https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0137.html#usecase.xdata
pep.
I'm thinking somewhere in Β§12 or before or after
pep.
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#impl
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
Nano4BeingYouhas joined
mukt2has joined
florettahas left
sonnyhas joined
papatutuwawahas left
papatutuwawahas joined
lovetoxhas left
sonnyhas left
mukt2has left
eevvoorhas joined
florettahas joined
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
lorddavidiiihas left
etahas left
etahas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
peetahhas left
peetahhas joined
sonnyhas joined
Steve Killehas left
lovetoxhas joined
sonnyhas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
alameyohas joined
Steve Killehas joined
karoshihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
disgyze@jabber.ruhas joined
disgyze@jabber.ruhas left
disgyze@jabber.ruhas joined
speedballhas joined
disgyze@jabber.ruhas left
disgyzehas joined
disgyzehas left
disgyzehas joined
karoshihas joined
Yagizahas left
Yagizahas joined
mukt2has joined
pep.
How do I link from a XEP to an anchor in another XEP?
pep.
Just a normal html link?
pep.
I mean, <link/> with a normal html url?
pep.
xep-1234.html#foo ?
papatutuwawahas left
sonnyhas joined
papatutuwawahas joined
speedballhas left
emus
On todays meeting:
ralphm pep. guus.der.kinderen Seve
Even you don't see your responsibility there (but I support Seve asking for opinion, because I also couldn't evaluate myself): You all would likely put txxmpp into the library list than client? Or do you not care to put it into the client list and one need to find out himself?
In general I think not haveing a client list is very bad + I think XSF should try to maintain a list. Because here is the most knowledge on XMPP aggregated and that's where one would go first in my understanding and view.
lovetoxhas left
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
sonnyhas left
pep.
For txxmpp specifically, I don't see why it wouldn't go into the client list. There is no requirement that this list must only include clients that provide a binary, or have documentation, or even match any definition of a "chat" application. There is simply no requirements.
sonnyhas joined
papatutuwawahas left
papatutuwawahas joined
karoshihas left
pep.
I'd rather discuss a proposal that adds such a definition. In the meantime I think it perfectly fits the no-criteria requirements for the client list
Nekithas left
pep.
As for the second point about having a client list, I disagree. I think xmpp.org is not the right place for this. Having a generic list of things is at best misleading
karoshihas joined
sonnyhas left
emus
> I'd rather discuss a proposal that adds such a definition. In the meantime I think it perfectly fits the no-criteria requirements for the client list
Yes okay, I would keep it just simple as it is, as long as its not completely out of space.
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
pep.
What do you mean "simple"?
pep.
We can't do that, we have to accept all clients that ask to be in the list otherwise we wouldn't be "neutral" :/
emus
> As for the second point about having a client list, I disagree. I think xmpp.org is not the right place for this. Having a generic list of things is at best misleading
I dont see where it is generic?
I think not even haveing a list of this anymore is another step disconnecting from the actual applied community. And I think that is not good.
Holger
xmpp.org is about presenting the protocol. I would've thought it makes some sense to showcase a few implementations as examples. But it's probably mostly irrelevant to end users. They'll search app stores. (In theory. In practice their geek friends tell them to install client $x.)
emus
> What do you mean "simple"?
Just not put any further hurdles in making PRs to a list
pep.
Holger, not everybody does that unfortunately :/
Holger
pep.: Does what?
pep.
For a really long time people would create accounts on xmpp.jp because it's what xmpp.org presented first
Andrzejhas left
emus
> We can't do that, we have to accept all clients that ask to be in the list otherwise we wouldn't be "neutral" :/
Yes✎
Holger
Ah.
emus
> We can't do that, we have to accept all clients that ask to be in the list otherwise we wouldn't be "neutral" :/
Yes, I mean all XMPP ✏
emus
I dont see why XSF cannot present what people are actually doing the the protocol
lovetoxhas joined
pep.
emus, the issue with having is list is multiple. First we can't even get people to agree on criteria, so we have as little as possible. Some are tring to fight against having unmaintained implementations while some other want their implementation to be able to make it up the list so they're rather not be too specific.
pep.
That's a first point
pep.
Then presenting a list not having any idea who the target is and what they're looking for, how they ended up here. No description of clients, what kind of clients they are (I discovered today some think there should only be "chat" clients in there?), etc.
pep.
As a user I'd just be lost with so much choice and no directions
pep.
I don't want to end up here
emus
Hmm, yes, but if there is no agreement so far its better having one list, all or no one, than have no list in my view.
However, I know now what you mean my criteria, I thought about something different.✎
emus
Hmm, yes, but if there is no agreement so far its better having one list, all or no one, than have no list in my view.
However, I know now what you mean with criteria, I thought about something different. ✏
lovetox
maybe an idea would be to create another organization which defines own goals for the xmpp world
lovetox
instead of trying to make the xsf into it
Zash
A lobby organization, charged with promotion of XMPP? Mmmmmm
Wojtekhas left
emus
Yeah, there you see ... I only see fights between those possible two organisations from the current situation
pep.
Holger, I'd rather showcase in XEPs with things like DOAP for example
emus
pep.: Sorry whats DOAP again?
Zash
Of course you don't need a separate organization to make a web page with a list of clients presented in a nice format
pep.
A document in which implementations say what XEP they support etc.
lovetox
Zash, yeah completly separate
lovetox
own homepage, own logo
Zash
cf modernxmpp
lovetox
for example
emus
yes, thats also fine
lovetox
and if enough client/server developers back this organisation
AIUI modernxmpp is meant to be more like extended implementation notes and guidelines for stuff other than the protocol itself
lovetox
i mean thats what most of you want anyway or not :)?
pep.
lovetox, sure. With implementations still having a choice to follow it or not
Zash
point being you can have a group/org/webpage with a different focus, and let the XSF focus on herding XEs
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
emus
--> I did not intend to say to loose the focus on on the protocol βπ✎
emus
--> I did not intend to say to loose the focus on the protocol βπ ✏
Syndacehas left
intosihas left
mukt2has left
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
lovetox
Zash, exactly, and i guess people want to make the XSF into it, because the XSF has some kind of official authority
lovetox
my point was, if enough client/server devs back this new org, it has enough authority
Zash
... for what?
lovetox
for example to push compliance regulations
Zash
you don't even need that, you just need a popular client
lovetox
or to decide to *not* showcase unmaintained clients
lovetox
just an idea, i dont care too much, just see people fighting over this XSF direction stuff for a long time
lovetox
and i think people need to ask themself why they so badly need the XSF to do it instead of some other org
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
Wojtekhas joined
lovetox
i would understand if the XSF had an agenda or direction it was pushing, but it seems XSF says we dont care, we are neutral we just publish XEPs
pep.
https://github.com/Ppjet6/xeps/commit/dcbb771034bff841fd4f8ad4fb68173f93e9c414 gonna submit something like this. Thoughts? before I push the PR button
lovetox
then this is perfect, for another org to not jujst push XEPs :)
lovetox
its not a competition then
pep.
The XSF does care. People really don't get that. #NeutralityIsALie.
karoshihas left
pep.
Wanting to showcase all clients is as much a direction than wanting to showcase a few clients
jonasβ
lovetox, people want to have a separate org, but lack the resources to do it
intosihas joined
pep.
MattJ maybe? ^ the commit above
Andrzejhas joined
karoshihas joined
mukt2has joined
Zash
pep.: Based on https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0122.html#usecases-datatypes I'm thinking it should have a prefix of some sort
pep.
pubsub:?
pep.
Or.. do we want this more generic?
Zash
> Start with a prefix registered with the XMPP Registrar [3]
Is there any such thing?
Zash
Ah, https://xmpp.org/registrar/xdv-prefixes.html
pep.
0137 has a sipub: prefix
pep.
right
Zash
So I guess pubsub: would follow this
pep.
Where do I add that
pep.
I'm always confused with registrar things
pep.
"2005-08-26 Added sipub: prefix specified in XEP-0137. (psa)", in the XEP directly? Same as the datatype?
sonnyhas joined
pep.
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0137.html#registrar.xdata-validate "The XMPP Registrar includes 'sipub:' in its registry of Data Forms Validation Datatype Prefixes."
pep.
Does that mean this XEP defines it. I'm failing at english, or is it spec-language I don't understand
Zash
That's Editor procedural stuff that's done on Draft or so?
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
Andrzejhas left
Alexhas left
intosihas left
sonnyhas left
Andrzejhas joined
Alexhas joined
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
eevvoorhas left
intosihas joined
mukt2has left
Andrzejhas left
Half-Shothas left
uhoreghas left
Rixon ππ¨has left
Half-Shothas joined
Rixon ππ¨has joined
uhoreghas joined
sonnyhas joined
focus121has left
focus121has joined
intosihas left
Nekithas joined
focus121has left
focus121has joined
Andrzejhas joined
focus121has left
focus121has joined
sonnyhas left
Marandahas left
mukt2has joined
pep.
https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/988 here. With a few questions
Yagizahas left
Yagizahas joined
APachhas left
APachhas joined
Nano4BeingYouhas left
intosihas joined
serge90has left
emus
> lovetox, people want to have a separate org, but lack the resources to do it
emus
I don't see that there are actually resources in XSF either
emus
Still, I personally would see fewer disconnect and not have another additional organisation✎
serge90has joined
Andrzejhas left
Andrzejhas joined
thorstenhas left
Yagizahas left
Syndacehas joined
Mikaelahas left
Marandahas joined
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
emus
Still, I personally would like to see fewer disconnect and not have another additional organisation ✏
sonnyhas joined
thorstenhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
Lancehas left
Andrzejhas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
intosihas left
werdanhas joined
lorddavidiiihas joined
MattJ
The problem is that the XSF consistently fails at anything much further beyond protocol development
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
adityaborikarhas left
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
pep.
I think it's rather that there's no will to do more by a majority. Be it for the (expected?) lack of resources or anything else, so the few attempts often fail indeed
Lancehas joined
sonnyhas left
intosihas joined
mukt2has left
thorstenhas left
thorstenhas joined
Andrzejhas joined
mukt2has joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
pasdesushihas joined
emus
I think the ressources problem could be dealt with
Zash
emus, recruiting? π
intosihas left
pasdesushihas left
pasdesushihas joined
emus
Thats not what I thought of. but is sonething we should think about in general, too.
I thought more into the direction, as pep. mentioned that there is a majority not wanting this, so who wants to work against that. If there is general support and motivation that will bring volunteers, I personally think.✎
emus
Thats not what I thought of. but is something we should think about in general, too.
I thought more into the direction, as pep. mentioned that there is a majority not wanting this, so who wants to work against that. If there is general support and motivation that will bring volunteers, I personally think. ✏