XSF Discussion - 2020-09-29

I already sent it here and there but just in case: I published things on https://joinxmpp.org/. I don't think I'll attribute time for this project any time soon, so I'd rather have someone motivated take care of it.

baguette

Some are missing context :p

🥖️

emus, did you mean https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/787 ?

📬📨 The end ot the month is close. If you haven't taken the chance do place your news of your project of interest to the XMPP Newsletter, now is the right time! https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/787 ✏

Zash: Indeed 😅

I just had a weird experience: in a MUC jid1 asked jid2 whether jid2 knows me.

When I asked why that is relevant first in the MUC and then via PM to jid1, this person kindly asked me to be more careful and never send him / her a PM.

Is there some netiquette about that?

generally speaking lots of people don't like being PMed without asking them in the MUC first.

hm, Shell I see, but I asked in the MUC first and received not answer.

then you're probably not gonna get an answer.

The person also did not tell me why it wants to know whether somebody else knows me.

Ok, I'll just forget about it and view it as a new kind of trolling.

Maybe they're more into “cooption” rather than “everybody's welcome”

Each circle has their own rules anyway

yes perhaps, I just dropped out ...

I sent an LC extension for XEP-0411 on 2020-09-01

I did not get a reflection of that from the mailing list or it went missing

did anyone receive that message? Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0411 (Bookmarks Conversion) Message-ID: <7436475.Z5bLfmyHiY@sinistra>

Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 16:05:23 -0000

is the last matching 0411 I have

Same, Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 16:05:23 -0000

20200804160705.E61288F7@atlas.jabber.org

No 0411 on https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2020-September/thread.html either

I'm always curious about what to do next, when a thing is vetoed by council with no way forward. (https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/972#issuecomment-700754653). Is it that council thinks this is not an issue worth solving (I don't personally know if it is)? Or is it that council doesn't give opinions on whether it's worth solving? Or..?

jonas’, am I following correctly that there's been something accepted?

https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/971#issuecomment-700757865

nvm then

Even though it's not exactly the first time I want to highlight that there's no proposed way forward ✏

#972 was rejected in favour of #971, superseded by #975

k

I mean, there’s a reason why council gives rationales

a rationale is always a statement about what’s wrong

you can go and fix what’s wrong

If you have a clue how, sure

and if you’re unsure how or if there are other problems, council members *are* human beings

I added more data to the #972 closure notice

Thanks

thanks for pointing it out