XSF Discussion - 2021-02-05


  1. intosi has left
  2. deuill has left
  3. deuill has joined
  4. intosi has joined
  5. debacle has left
  6. alameyo has left
  7. emus has left
  8. Seve has left
  9. intosi has left
  10. Andrzej has joined
  11. marek has left
  12. marek has joined
  13. Vaulor has left
  14. wladmis has joined
  15. Andrzej has left
  16. intosi has joined
  17. Zash has left
  18. Zash has joined
  19. Andrzej has joined
  20. lskdjf has left
  21. intosi has left
  22. alex-a-soto has left
  23. krauq has left
  24. Adi has left
  25. Andrzej has left
  26. govanify has left
  27. govanify has joined
  28. intosi has joined
  29. david has left
  30. david has joined
  31. arc has left
  32. arc has joined
  33. arc has left
  34. arc has joined
  35. arc has left
  36. arc has joined
  37. govanify has left
  38. Andrzej has joined
  39. govanify has joined
  40. intosi has left
  41. wurstsalat has left
  42. Andrzej has left
  43. intosi has joined
  44. intosi has left
  45. larma has left
  46. larma has joined
  47. stpeter has joined
  48. stpeter has left
  49. lskdjf has joined
  50. intosi has joined
  51. wladmis has left
  52. govanify has left
  53. govanify has joined
  54. intosi has left
  55. lskdjf has left
  56. stp has left
  57. govanify has left
  58. govanify has joined
  59. intosi has joined
  60. govanify has left
  61. govanify has joined
  62. intosi has left
  63. alameyo has joined
  64. Yagiza has joined
  65. neshtaxmpp has joined
  66. Andrzej has joined
  67. mukt2 has left
  68. intosi has joined
  69. murabito has left
  70. Andrzej has left
  71. murabito has joined
  72. intosi has left
  73. LNJ has left
  74. intosi has joined
  75. neshtaxmpp has left
  76. govanify has left
  77. govanify has joined
  78. govanify has left
  79. govanify has joined
  80. xsf has left
  81. Kev has left
  82. Kev has joined
  83. xsf has joined
  84. Mikaela has joined
  85. intosi has left
  86. govanify has left
  87. govanify has joined
  88. antranigv has joined
  89. antranigv has left
  90. antranigv has joined
  91. Vaulor has joined
  92. Andrzej has joined
  93. intosi has joined
  94. Andrzej has left
  95. neshtaxmpp has joined
  96. Andrzej has joined
  97. andy has joined
  98. intosi has left
  99. intosi has joined
  100. Seve has joined
  101. Mikaela has left
  102. Mikaela has joined
  103. Tobias has joined
  104. intosi has left
  105. Andrzej has left
  106. jcbrand has joined
  107. intosi has joined
  108. govanify has left
  109. govanify has joined
  110. wurstsalat has joined
  111. neshtaxmpp has left
  112. Mikaela has left
  113. intosi has left
  114. chronosx88 has left
  115. chronosx88 has joined
  116. arc has left
  117. arc has joined
  118. intosi has joined
  119. arc has left
  120. arc has joined
  121. emus has joined
  122. alacer has left
  123. alacer has joined
  124. intosi has left
  125. intosi has joined
  126. arc has left
  127. arc has joined
  128. arc has left
  129. arc has joined
  130. krauq has joined
  131. alex-a-soto has joined
  132. Adi has joined
  133. intosi has left
  134. fuana has joined
  135. goffi has joined
  136. fuana has left
  137. Mikaela has joined
  138. pasdesushi has joined
  139. marc has left
  140. marc has joined
  141. intosi has joined
  142. fuana has joined
  143. pasdesushi has left
  144. Andrzej has joined
  145. neshtaxmpp has joined
  146. pasdesushi has joined
  147. pasdesushi has left
  148. fuana has left
  149. ti_gj06 has joined
  150. Andrzej has left
  151. govanify has left
  152. govanify has joined
  153. Mikaela has left
  154. lorddavidiii has joined
  155. govanify has left
  156. govanify has joined
  157. purplebeetroot has joined
  158. Alex has left
  159. chronosx88 has left
  160. chronosx88 has joined
  161. Alex has joined
  162. floretta has left
  163. Mikaela has joined
  164. mathijs has left
  165. mathijs has joined
  166. Andrzej has joined
  167. mathijs has left
  168. pasdesushi has joined
  169. pasdesushi has left
  170. chronosx88 has left
  171. chronosx88 has joined
  172. mathijs has joined
  173. govanify has left
  174. govanify has joined
  175. Mikaela has left
  176. neshtaxmpp has left
  177. floretta has joined
  178. Tim has joined
  179. Tim has left
  180. Tim has joined
  181. Tim has left
  182. Tim has joined
  183. wladmis has joined
  184. deuill has left
  185. Dele Olajide has joined
  186. deuill has joined
  187. ti_gj06 has left
  188. floretta has left
  189. ti_gj06 has joined
  190. debacle has joined
  191. Tim has left
  192. Tim has joined
  193. pasdesushi has joined
  194. pasdesushi has left
  195. pasdesushi has joined
  196. marek has left
  197. pasdesushi has left
  198. pasdesushi has joined
  199. marek has joined
  200. nyco has left
  201. pasdesushi has left
  202. neshtaxmpp has joined
  203. purplebeetroot has left
  204. nyco has joined
  205. pasdesushi has joined
  206. pasdesushi has left
  207. pasdesushi has joined
  208. pasdesushi has left
  209. pasdesushi has joined
  210. pasdesushi has left
  211. pasdesushi has joined
  212. pasdesushi has left
  213. pasdesushi has joined
  214. Steve Kille has left
  215. Steve Kille has joined
  216. pasdesushi has left
  217. pasdesushi has joined
  218. papatutuwawa has joined
  219. pasdesushi has left
  220. LNJ has joined
  221. pasdesushi has joined
  222. papatutuwawa has left
  223. papatutuwawa has joined
  224. papatutuwawa has left
  225. papatutuwawa has joined
  226. papatutuwawa has left
  227. papatutuwawa has joined
  228. papatutuwawa has left
  229. pasdesushi has left
  230. pasdesushi has joined
  231. papatutuwawa has joined
  232. papatutuwawa has left
  233. papatutuwawa has joined
  234. pasdesushi has left
  235. Wojtek has joined
  236. pasdesushi has joined
  237. nyco has left
  238. Mikaela has joined
  239. ti_gj06 has left
  240. floretta has joined
  241. intosi has left
  242. neshtaxmpp has left
  243. ti_gj06 has joined
  244. andrey.g has joined
  245. intosi has joined
  246. Mikaela has left
  247. sonny has left
  248. sonny has joined
  249. chronosx88 has left
  250. chronosx88 has joined
  251. sonny has left
  252. sonny has joined
  253. intosi has left
  254. Tim has left
  255. Tim has joined
  256. stp has joined
  257. Tim has left
  258. antranigv has left
  259. floretta has left
  260. nyco has joined
  261. Tim has joined
  262. sonny has left
  263. sonny has joined
  264. intosi has joined
  265. pasdesushi has left
  266. pasdesushi has joined
  267. papatutuwawa has left
  268. deuill has left
  269. stp has left
  270. pasdesushi has left
  271. adiaholic has left
  272. adiaholic has joined
  273. deuill has joined
  274. pasdesushi has joined
  275. floretta has joined
  276. pasdesushi has left
  277. Steve Kille has left
  278. Steve Kille has joined
  279. mukt2 has joined
  280. mathieui Am I the only one who thinks that the stickers XEP could use BOB?
  281. mukt2 has left
  282. Alex has left
  283. lskdjf has joined
  284. Andrzej has left
  285. Andrzej has joined
  286. Alex has joined
  287. fuana has joined
  288. ti_gj06 has left
  289. fuana has left
  290. lskdjf has left
  291. pasdesushi has joined
  292. mathijs has left
  293. mathijs has joined
  294. sonny has left
  295. sonny has joined
  296. pasdesushi has left
  297. franck has left
  298. franck has joined
  299. Zash mathieui: Plausibly.
  300. Zash Maybe.
  301. fuana has joined
  302. mathieui Ah right, BOB requires XHTML-IM, and we cannot have nice things anymore
  303. Zash Does it?
  304. Andrzej has left
  305. Zash Couldn't you plausibly send a cid:-URI in OOB or anything?
  306. mathieui That is technically allowed as far as I am aware
  307. Zash Obviously we can't have nice things tho.
  308. lorddavidiii has left
  309. mathieui although that makes yet another thing which is not end-to-end encrypted leading to a data leak, and we cannot have nice things
  310. fuana has left
  311. franck has left
  312. franck has joined
  313. fuana has joined
  314. Link Mauve We’d have to migrate to OMEMO++ first.
  315. fuana has left
  316. jonas’ Link Mauve, do we?
  317. Link Mauve I think so?
  318. jonas’ FSE (full stanza encryption) is possible with OMEMO v0.3 IIRC
  319. jonas’ FSE (full stanza encryption) is possible with OMEMO v0.7 IIRC
  320. Link Mauve Current deployed OMEMO doesn’t support it, as that’s 0.3 or something.
  321. jonas’ Link Mauve, but then we just need OMEMO vdeployed++, not OMEMO++
  322. jonas’ (which I read as "a replacement for OMEMO")
  323. mathieui Link Mauve, that still does not cover the <iq/> file retrieval
  324. Link Mauve mathieui, oh?
  325. jonas’ mathieui, XMPP over IBB over <message/>!
  326. Link Mauve jonas’, my bad, that’s what I meant.
  327. mathieui Link Mauve, or does it?
  328. Link Mauve mathieui, <iq><omemo-encrypted><iq/></omemo-encrypted></iq>
  329. mathieui oh yeah, in an hypothetical future that may work
  330. jonas’ uhh
  331. jonas’ scratches head
  332. mathieui also that is still some kind of leak
  333. jonas’ I’m sure that will work just fine.
  334. mathieui looks at XTLS
  335. Andrzej has joined
  336. Zash mixmaster over XMPP?
  337. Zash or ... what was that email thing called?
  338. sonny has left
  339. sonny has joined
  340. fuana has joined
  341. eta has left
  342. eta has joined
  343. vanitasvitae > mathieui, <iq><omemo-encrypted><iq/></omemo-encrypted></iq> I tried to come up with a solution for encrypted <iq>s in sce
  344. vanitasvitae https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0420.html#use-case-iq
  345. jonas’ ha, it even uses BOB as example
  346. vanitasvitae ;)
  347. vanitasvitae So if someone does some experiments with it, please share feedback
  348. eta has left
  349. eta has joined
  350. fuana has left
  351. eta has left
  352. eta has joined
  353. Half-Shot has left
  354. uhoreg has left
  355. Matthew has left
  356. Rixon 👁🗨 has left
  357. Rixon 👁🗨 has joined
  358. uhoreg has joined
  359. Half-Shot has joined
  360. Matthew has joined
  361. alameyo has left
  362. ti_gj06 has joined
  363. andrey.g has left
  364. Guus has left
  365. Andrzej has left
  366. Guus has joined
  367. alameyo has joined
  368. eta has left
  369. eta has joined
  370. fuana has joined
  371. mukt2 has joined
  372. eta has left
  373. eta has joined
  374. lorddavidiii has joined
  375. eta has left
  376. eta has joined
  377. floretta has left
  378. fuana has left
  379. Tim has left
  380. stpeter has joined
  381. stpeter has left
  382. mukt2 has left
  383. mathijs has left
  384. mathijs has joined
  385. floretta has joined
  386. pasdesushi has joined
  387. fuana has joined
  388. pasdesushi has left
  389. papatutuwawa has joined
  390. fuana has left
  391. franck has left
  392. franck has joined
  393. fuana has joined
  394. mukt2 has joined
  395. fuana has left
  396. emus has left
  397. mathijs has left
  398. pasdesushi has joined
  399. LNJ has left
  400. emus has joined
  401. intosi has left
  402. mukt2 has left
  403. Mikaela has joined
  404. intosi has joined
  405. pasdesushi has left
  406. lorddavidiii has left
  407. pasdesushi has joined
  408. pasdesushi has left
  409. pasdesushi has joined
  410. arc Good morning everyone
  411. vanitasvitae hi arc
  412. arc Board meeting in 15 minutes. Do we have everyone this week?
  413. MattJ o/
  414. pasdesushi has left
  415. pasdesushi has joined
  416. chronosx88 has left
  417. chronosx88 has joined
  418. LNJ has joined
  419. arc There's also the foss foundations virtual drink up after the board meeting. Which would normally be held at this time in Brussels
  420. pasdesushi has left
  421. fuana has joined
  422. pasdesushi has joined
  423. fuana has left
  424. fuana has joined
  425. pasdesushi has left
  426. pasdesushi has joined
  427. papatutuwawa has left
  428. ralphm bangs gavel
  429. ralphm 0. Welcome
  430. ralphm Hi!
  431. ralphm Who do we have today?
  432. arc Here
  433. MattJ Here
  434. ralphm dwd, Seve?
  435. fuana has left
  436. Seve Hi
  437. arc That is technically quorum? Not ideal though
  438. pasdesushi has left
  439. ralphm I see 4 out of 5
  440. arc I typed that when we only had three 😋
  441. ralphm Ok
  442. ralphm I didn't see minutes, but I think we said we'd start with GSoC. Any other topics?
  443. mathijs has joined
  444. arc Are we as a board tackling the summit? That probably would have otherwise taken place this last week?
  445. ralphm Actually right now.
  446. ralphm FOSDEM is tomorrow
  447. arc It does not seem that SCAM is active right now
  448. mathijs has left
  449. mathijs has joined
  450. mathijs has left
  451. mathijs has joined
  452. krauq has left
  453. Zash Accurate. Last I looked, SCAM had no activity for months.
  454. ralphm I think the last meeting was in October
  455. arc I'm not criticizing, it happens to all of us. I'm just saying that we as a board should not be deferring to an inactive committee.
  456. ralphm And I think that's understandable, with lockdowns and stuff.
  457. ralphm We haven't actively asked SCAM to look into a virtual Summit
  458. arc In any case, we should perhaps put that on the intended today. since we are virtual this year we can always tackle it next week or two weeks from now
  459. ralphm https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/scam/2020-October/000007.html
  460. Daniel I'm personally not the biggest fan of online invents. The few events I attended last year haven't been very fun. I might attend a summit but I'm personally not super keen on organizing something I wouldn't really enjoy myself.
  461. lskdjf has joined
  462. Daniel Saying this as a scam member
  463. Daniel Not sure about my fellow team members
  464. Daniel So feel free to send an official inquiry
  465. ralphm This is the last meeting, where they explicitly stated that 2021 is not an in-person event and there was scepticism on having a virtual one. That said, I like the ideas presented last week and we should go ahead with them.
  466. Zash Observation: pep. left the XSF some time after that.
  467. MattJ Daniel, I don't think you're alone, and I agree that online is far from ideal compared to in-person meetups
  468. ralphm ++
  469. MattJ I get the impression that FOSDEM have struggled to find speakers, I believe interest has been lower
  470. arc But we can't shut down as an organization just because we can't do in person events
  471. MattJ But I also don't believe we can legitimately take a year off
  472. Andrzej has joined
  473. MattJ I agree
  474. MattJ Less than ideal is better than nothing
  475. Zash Suggestion (hat:xsf member): Postmortem for this would be good.
  476. ralphm Last week it was pointed out that not having any type of gathering would leave us without concentrated discussions on protocol, as we usually have at the Summit.
  477. Kev I think, FWIW, FOSDEM’s appeal as a virtual event would be lower than the Summit’s. But I could be very wrong about how effectively we can have a 30/40 person remote Summit.
  478. Mikaela has left
  479. wladmis has left
  480. wladmis has joined
  481. Zash Kev, we could see it as a stress-test of online meeting things, then split into focus groups to argue about XEPs.
  482. arc I think an online event would be better if we spread it out. Instead of everyone getting together for one day, split the topics up and have several focused meetings
  483. MattJ arc, agreed
  484. arc My experience with online events is there better when they're shorter
  485. Kev I don’t agree with that, FWIW. It’s much easier for me to block out one day that’s going to be an event to attend than work an hour here and there into my work week.
  486. MattJ Shorter and more focused. I'm sure not going to hang around all day in a 40-person online video conference
  487. Daniel Time zones will probably also put a limit on it
  488. Kev But not disagreeing to the point that I’m going to argue it shouldn’t happen.
  489. Daniel Probably something in the European pm
  490. ralphm Daniel, with your scam hat on, do you think your team would pick up planning / organising something like this?
  491. govanify has left
  492. govanify has joined
  493. Daniel If the team is just me then the honest answer to that is no
  494. Mikaela has joined
  495. ralphm Well, officially SCAM is also Guus and nyco.
  496. Dele Olajide has left
  497. Daniel What's the amount of organzing you want to put into this
  498. Daniel Like should we just pick a week day and have four weeks after each other with 2-3 hours each?
  499. MattJ I think the logistics of organizing an online event (or multiple) are far lower than an in-person event
  500. MattJ i.e. I don't really care if SCAM isn't going to do anything. Multiple community members do want to do something, and I hope we can self-organize.
  501. ralphm Sure. Starting with a wiki page for collecting ideas seems prudent.
  502. MattJ I would try help out with that, but the next few weeks will be difficult for me
  503. arc Let's continue discussion after the meeting
  504. arc We do have the agenda item of gsoc
  505. ralphm right
  506. ralphm 1. GSoC
  507. mathijs has left
  508. mathijs has joined
  509. ralphm :-D
  510. Wojtek has left
  511. ralphm So, last time I remember, arc explained that payments by Google are lower and suggested the XSF compensates.
  512. mathijs has left
  513. arc I would actually suggest that we compensate by shifting to outreachy this year
  514. Kev Lower, but the time is lower too isn’t it? Aren’t students expected to do half the work for half the pay?
  515. arc Yep. But they also shut down several other programs, we may be looking at the last year, or years, of gsoc
  516. lskdjf It's not just that the payments are lower, the projects are also supposed to be _shorter_. So the payment per time stays the same. Google apparently wants to try and open gsoc to more people, and they think that shorter projects are beneficial for that goal.
  517. ralphm For those here (including floor) who've mentored, are shorter projects expected to be effective (enough)?
  518. Kev I don’t want to shit on Google for making the change, they can do what they like with the programme. But a lot of the overhead for mentors and orgs is frontloaded.
  519. ralphm Oh, don't take me wrong. I am just curious if the change would work *for us*.
  520. Kev So the amount of code produced is much lower relative to mentor/admin effort, and the change (I predict with no data) of integrating people into the community is lower (but there is a counter argument that it might be higher because it’s less mercenary).
  521. fuana has joined
  522. mathijs has joined
  523. fuana has left
  524. fuana has joined
  525. arc I think it is still worth doing.
  526. SamWhited FWIW I had been thinking about trying to get my project into GSoC this year under the XSF organization. I haven't done it before, but smaller projects would actually fit in with the handful of ideas I had much better than the old larger ones.
  527. arc I'm just suggesting we start to shift to outreachy. Because GSoC has always been a valuable program, and should it come to an end with this year, it would be ready to fully shift over
  528. mathijs has left
  529. Zash There's a GSoC for documentation, right? Anyone have any experience with that? May be closer to the core XSF thing of writing specifications, and FOSS projects are often struggling with keeping their docs up to date.
  530. ralphm There is, but it is later
  531. govanify has left
  532. govanify has joined
  533. arc GSoC is about writing code, not "documentation"
  534. Zash I'm referring to Season of Docs
  535. mathijs has joined
  536. arc Ah.
  537. ralphm I think, if they do it again, it will be announced in March
  538. Zash Indeed, so ignore me until then 🙂
  539. larma I don't see an issue with smaller projects. Surely needs some adjustments to how we do things, but probably still worth it. At least for the projects that are not backed by companies
  540. mathijs has left
  541. ralphm I understand (from last meeting) that arc would be happy to admin (if no one else is interested) and that Kev would be around to help if he has spare cycles. Arc also suggested shifting to outreachy but I haven't seem any response on that here.
  542. ralphm seen
  543. Andrzej has left
  544. arc I have some response from there.
  545. SamWhited ¿Por qué no los dos?
  546. arc For both programs we mostly need an idea's list
  547. neshtaxmpp has joined
  548. ralphm SamWhited, I am not sure what the overhead is of running both
  549. ralphm Organisationally, paying out is different. For Outreachy, we'd have to do this ourselves.
  550. ralphm arc: can you start collecting ideas, while we figure this out?
  551. arc Yep, happy to.
  552. ralphm (i.e. do the wiki thing)
  553. ralphm Thanks!
  554. larma ralphm: I don't think we do the payouts with outreachy, we just provide the money.
  555. arc That is true.
  556. ralphm which is differnt from GSoC, I haven't looked at the specifics
  557. arc We supply the funding, but the people in charge of outreachy do the payouts.
  558. LNJ has left
  559. LNJ has joined
  560. ralphm Good to know.
  561. larma (And they charge a huge cut for the processing)
  562. ralphm Next week, let's discuss if we want to do GSoC, Outreachy, or both and how. For now let's gather the ideas.
  563. ralphm I think that's all the time we have today.
  564. ralphm 2. Date of Next
  565. ralphm +1W
  566. ralphm 3. Close
  567. ralphm Thanks all!
  568. ralphm bangs gavel
  569. Seve Thank you guys!
  570. larma I think we should get this to the mailing list, because I'm missing inputs from flow, vanitasvitae and other previous gsoc mentors/admins
  571. lskdjf Since GSoC doesn't require the XSF to contribute money, I don't understand why the XSF doesn't just go with it as long as GSoC exists and there are project maintainers that want to make use of it.
  572. mathijs has joined
  573. SamWhited Reading through the outreachy community guidelines and I really like how they structure this. Seems like it would be a lot more work for the XSF since we'd have to be the fiscal sponsor and we'd probably be able to sponsor fewer interns who would have to pick the project they want to work on from among all the people vying to be their mentor, but it seems like it would be a good fit
  574. Kev FWIW, I’m a little uneasy about the XSF using its limited funds to pay for development of some projects over others. If the money came from the projects themselves that concern goes away.
  575. neshtaxmpp has left
  576. SamWhited The XSF probably wouldn't pick the projects, projects would just apply and the interns would pick them I think. The XSF is just paying interns.
  577. Kev Well, surely the XSF chooses which internships get selected, like GSoC.
  578. moparisthebest could just require all code written by XSF-funded interns to be AGPLv3 , then there is no conflict of interest problems if a company wants free labor :D
  579. SamWhited I think it would just pick the students though, give them a list of projects that applied for an intern, and the students would pick the project, but maybe not.
  580. MattJ Kev, you've raised that issue in the past, and I have to say I think I increasingly dislike it as time goes on
  581. franck has left
  582. SamWhited And the XSF could just not vet the projects beyond "it meets the criteria defined by the program" (which is basically "OSI approved license"
  583. mathijs has left
  584. neshtaxmpp has joined
  585. MattJ I mean, dislike having that as a rule the XSF should follow
  586. larma The issue seems to be that Outreachy targets open-source communities but the XSF isn't an open-source community but an open-standards organization.
  587. SamWhited The XSF would just be the fiscal sponsor acting as an umbrella like we do for GSoC, in my mind.
  588. MattJ If the code funded by the XSF is open-source then I have no problem with the XSF funding projects
  589. MattJ I *would* have issue with it funding closed-source projects
  590. Mikaela has left
  591. SamWhited If the XSF doesn't want to directly fund projects, they could also create a pool that projects and individuals can donate too and just be the fiscal sponsor without using any of their own money
  592. moparisthebest how do you define "is open-source" ? like I think SamWhited 's "OSI approved license" is correct, but that has to be the license it's submitted under too, ie, no CLA's ?
  593. MattJ The XSF... or another organization (back into that loop :) )
  594. SamWhited (since we're a US 501(c)3 but projects likely aren't and don't have a legal entity they can use)
  595. SamWhited moparisthebest: they have a definition on their website, I don't think we need to care beyond whatever they say
  596. Andrzej has joined
  597. Zash whispers "Snikket CIC"
  598. larma MattJ: I share that opinion, but IIRC the XSF is believed to be neutral regarding open source vs closed source and this would be non-neutral...
  599. eta has left
  600. eta has joined
  601. Kev MattJ: There is pragmatism in my reason, FWIW, not just dogma. Getting sponsors happy to give money to random projects rather than directly helping XMPP Standards Development seems questionable. Maybe I’m wrong. Although I do know that some sponsorship hasn’t happened in the past because one of Board was mouthing off about the XSF not supporting anyone who wanted to make money off XMPP.
  602. SamWhited *nods* any org would do
  603. MattJ Zash, Snikket may be too opinionated for this particular case (despite having sponsored a bunch of open-source development in the past 12 months)
  604. mathijs has joined
  605. franck has joined
  606. neshtaxmpp has left
  607. mathijs has left
  608. moparisthebest doesn't that assume projects don't directly help XMPP Standards Development? that seems wrong
  609. eta has left
  610. MattJ Zash, OTOH maybe not, if it's a separate "fund the ecosystem" thing
  611. eta has joined
  612. MattJ moparisthebest, I agree, I think that's my thinking. Throwing money into standards development (??) is not what XMPP needs right now
  613. govanify has left
  614. govanify has joined
  615. Kev (FWIW, while I don’t know how effective it is, I am glad Snikket is doing what Snikket is doing)
  616. SamWhited I would actually be open to filing paperwork to start a thing that just accepts donations on behalf of XMPP projects, acts as a fiscal sponsor on OpenCollective or somewhere, does things like this, etc. if anyone is interested
  617. moparisthebest I'd argue helping fund development on these projects *is* throwing it directly into standards development
  618. Kev If the XSF wants to do Outreachy, why not try to get sponsors specifically for money to spend on Outreachy? That would render my concerns completely irrelevant.
  619. moparisthebest "standards development" isn't anything anyone here has ever done, am I wrong on that?
  620. SamWhited That sounds reasonable too, I do think the XSF is already positioned to be a fiscal sponsor for projects, it doesn't have to necessarily put its own money towards it
  621. moparisthebest instead, you have a need in a project/product/whatever, and standards come out of that
  622. eta has left
  623. eta has joined
  624. Kev All standards work is mean to be writing standards for things that are needed, I’m not sure what that point is.
  625. Kev Certainly people here have written standards, and certainly before implementations (and even without needing to implement it themselves).
  626. SamWhited board people: is this something that could go on the board meeting next week to discuss? Ie. can the XSF act as a fiscal sponsor for projects (where it just keeps track of money for them)? If so, I'd volunteer to help with that. If not, I'd volunteer to start an organization specifically for that.
  627. moparisthebest that process doesn't start out by writing standards though, it starts out by having a problem and thinking about how to solve it with code, in a project
  628. neshtaxmpp has joined
  629. mathijs has joined
  630. Kev That is demonstrably wrong. We have written Standards to solve problems, before thinking about the code to go with them.
  631. moparisthebest so, funding code for project == funding standard development, in my opinion
  632. SamWhited moparisthebest: I think the best specs do that, but lots of them do it with no code written
  633. moparisthebest hehe, yea that's how you get standards no one implements
  634. moparisthebest MIX for example
  635. Kev Some of the worst specs come out of writing code before thinking about standardising too :)
  636. moparisthebest that's also fair
  637. moparisthebest so let's say "funding code for a project where standards are thought about from day 1" == "funding standard development"
  638. Zash moparisthebest, https://xkcd.com/844/
  639. SamWhited I think the worst specs come from *deploying* code before thinking about standardizing, not necessarily writing it :) writing it, then standardizing is sort of like writing unit tests before the code; you end up going back and forth and making changes, but it's good to have at least some basic unit tests to flush out the general shape of it first
  640. Zash also Kev
  641. Zash The worst code comes from writing code!
  642. SamWhited sorry, before it gets lost, /cc ralphm, arc, other board people see question above
  643. Mikaela has joined
  644. eta has left
  645. eta has joined
  646. fuana has left
  647. Kev So, to avoid any misunderstanding, I’m concretely in favour of the XSF gathering sponsorship to pay for some Outreachy interns, and doing Outreachy with it.
  648. mathijs has left
  649. fuana has joined
  650. Kev Although if we have reason to suspect this will be the last year of GSoC, there is a strong argument for trying to get money out of Google while we can :)
  651. arc I am reading, SamWhited. And remember I've been talking about seeking outside funding for a while.
  652. stp has joined
  653. moparisthebest assuming board decides it wants to do this at all, sounds like they need to decide 1. if it can be funded "normally" or 2. if it needs special funding
  654. SamWhited arc: my question isn't necessarily about outside funding (although the XSF could help raise that too for things like Outreachy) but about if I as a project want to take donations in many places I need a legal entity. Some NGOs act as fiscal sponsors and take donations that they keep separated out for other projects, and if the XSF was willing to act that way for open source projects that would probably be a big help to the ecosystem
  655. arc As a general rule, organizations that do things, are able to get funding to continue doing those things. We should not devolve into arguing about the distribution of those funds.
  656. SamWhited To be clear, the XSF wouldn't be distributing funds itself or deciding how they get distributed.
  657. arc I would be in favor of that. Especially since most XMPP projects are fairly small with only a few developers, and it is a big overhead for them to serve as their own fiscal sponsors
  658. SamWhited For example, let's say my project (Mellium) wants to take donations. Right now those go to me, I am personally liable, they are not tax deductible, and most organizations that process donations won't touch me with a 10 foot pole.
  659. SamWhited If the XSF were my fiscal sponsor though, the donation button on my website would go to the XSF and they'd just put it in the "Mellium" account or whatever. Other projects could do the same.
  660. arc I understand. I have served on the boards for a few fiscal sponsors.
  661. arc I am in favor of that. It is really not that much work for the small number of organizations we have.
  662. SamWhited 👍 (I've been specifically looking for one to use for some projects on OpenCollective and vaguely considering trying to start something, but at least for Mellium the XSF would be a logical place if it's something we have enough peopel to work on)
  663. SamWhited And I would volunteer since it's easier than starting a separate entity for me.
  664. arc Actually this might be an ideal time for this conversation. The FOSS foundations online drink up just started
  665. fuana has left
  666. SamWhited arc: link?
  667. arc Which is literally the people that you should be talking to 😋
  668. SamWhited I looked for FOSS Foundation when you mentioned it earlier but couldn't find anything?
  669. SamWhited I'm curious about this though
  670. arc https://video.eventyay.com/b/mar-rgt-jgy-zk0
  671. SamWhited Although it's only 1300 here, but meh, it's time for a beer somewhere
  672. arc It is 10:00 a.m. here
  673. SamWhited arc: are you still in Portland?
  674. arc Yep
  675. SamWhited Cool, a friend of mine is trying to move there right now (from Seattle)
  676. mdosch Too much rain, 'eh?
  677. mdosch Oh no, 'eh is vancouver. 😂
  678. arc I would recommend South Portland. Close to downtown, not terribly expensive, but quiet and not so much crime
  679. eta has left
  680. eta has joined
  681. Yagiza has left
  682. eta has left
  683. eta has joined
  684. arc It's not one of the rich people's neighborhoods. But if you wanted to go boating, eg, I live about two blocks from a boat launch.
  685. Tim has joined
  686. adiaholic has left
  687. Tim has left
  688. Tim has joined
  689. Andrzej has left
  690. fuana has joined
  691. adiaholic has joined
  692. Andrzej has joined
  693. intosi has left
  694. fuana has left
  695. fuana has joined
  696. papatutuwawa has joined
  697. arc This is a great example for the need for better foss a/v meeting software. Of course, xmpp based! BigBlueButton has problems
  698. antranigv has joined
  699. Tim has left
  700. Tim has joined
  701. Zash Well you've got Zoom and Jitsi.
  702. arc Zoom isn't foss?!
  703. Zash Nope. Touch of XMPP in there at least.
  704. fuana has left
  705. lskdjf has left
  706. Tim has left
  707. adiaholic has left
  708. arc I didn't know that. Not the first time I've been shocked. But I'm not talking about another multichat clone
  709. arc See the problem is that all the multi-chat software treats the room as if it were a stadium with a microphone. People step up on stage, speak into the microphone, sit down. Its slow and frustrating
  710. adiaholic has joined
  711. arc Especially with these larger meetups.
  712. intosi has joined
  713. SamWhited I don't think I've ever seen a good system for managing that in real life either that we could take as a metaphore for software
  714. arc And if someone were to work that out, AGPLv3 licensed, using xmpp, we win.
  715. arc Because it was instantly become they go to for every social group in the world
  716. mathieui arc, that is not true, jitsi meet does not do that
  717. Zash Wishing for something where you could, say, break off into smaller groups and talk more easily? Or whisper to whoever sits "next to you"?
  718. mathieui Also, zoom actually has "breakout rooms" which let you do just that (and it is nice in quite a lot of scenarios)
  719. SamWhited I'd push back on the AGPLv3 thing, but the "using xmpp" part sounds good :)
  720. SamWhited I think this has breakout rooms too, but I haven't tried it
  721. arc I'm thinking less formal. More like, groups in a room. Having two levels of microphone.
  722. Mikaela has left
  723. ralphm SamWhited: added to Trello
  724. Andrzej has left
  725. arc Less breakout rooms, more "circles". So you can wander through a room and talk to different circles. But everyone hears the person with the room microphone.
  726. arc SamWhited I thought you liked the AGPLv3
  727. Zash 2D location something and mic/speaker volume scaling?
  728. arc I wouldn't use or emulate location. Just letting people join circles.
  729. arc People have suggested using certain video games that do location based talking
  730. ralphm So ad hoc backchannels
  731. SamWhited arc: I am very strongly against AGPL (or basically everything GNU does); maybe that should be my controversial opinion :)
  732. arc Lol
  733. Kev Sam: You’re only allowed one.
  734. ralphm Also, I don't think it is controversial
  735. arc Ralphm yeah like adhoc breakout rooms. Which happen organically
  736. ralphm (the opinion, not Sam)
  737. SamWhited arc: I can't remember what it's called, but have you used the virtual neighborhoods chat thing? You sort of walk around a map like it's a little 2d video game and when you walk up to people their videos and mics fade in as you get close. It sounds gimmicky, but I've found it works very well
  738. arc People suggested that for this meeting. But here we are an hour on, still doing introductions
  739. arc I don't think we should be limited to emulating the real world. I'm thinking, do better than real world
  740. Kev It’d be good to start by not being worse than the physical world :)
  741. arc Lol true
  742. fuana has joined
  743. fuana has left
  744. fuana has joined
  745. arc Well it took an hour to mostly get through everyone's introductions 😂
  746. moparisthebest arc, me and pep were the very pro AGPLv3 for everything ones :)
  747. arc Chris DiBona sitting with Linux Torvalds convinced me that AGPLv3 is really the only way forward for FOSS.
  748. arc After that talk, I started relicensing everything. in increasingly lost interest in working on anything that's not.
  749. SamWhited I basically want an XMPP client but when you click a room on the left you get a video call on the right (possibly with chat too, but the focus is video calling). Which I guess is also like saying: Mumble with video. Instead of how most video call things work where you have semi-permanent rooms and you're really just in one at a time and can't switch between them rapidly
  750. arc Like, I haven't contributed to Gnome because all those contributions were LGPL.
  751. mathijs has joined
  752. Andrzej has joined
  753. adiaholic has left
  754. intosi has left
  755. SamWhited I basically feel the same way about (A)GPL as I do about politics; my actual deep-blood-of-the-worker-red comrades just think I'm pinko scum because I prefer the less limiting BSD, MIT, Apache, etc.
  756. arc Anything less is exploitive. I know too many housing challenged foss developers, many with some form of autism, working on foss because they love it. Many who's work is freely used my large corporations to make billions, and at best sometimes toss pocket change to those people. At best.
  757. arc The only people who are really limited by copyleft are the ones exploiting the community's work for profit. A vast majority of end users don't care what the license is.
  758. chronosx88 has left
  759. SamWhited I agree with the desire to make large companies using open source pay their share, but I don't think licensing is the way to do it. It hurts me when there are more restrcitions in a license too even though I'm just also an open source dev who will try to use it correctly. Now I have to worry if I'm complying with every detail, what counts as linking and what doesn't and how that would be interpreted legally, do I have to change my license just because I want to use some sortware that has a ton of restrictions making it incompatible with it, etc.
  760. ti_gj06 has left
  761. arc I am paraphrasing here, but Chris DiBona was asked why code.google.com banned the AGPLv3. And his answer was shockingly honest: because AGPLv3 license would bankrupt them.
  762. Zash And here I just wanna do my thing and not worry about licensing.
  763. SamWhited There's also what Zash just said… I don't want to worry about it. Slapping a BSD like license on it and only using stuff that's slimilarly permissive lets me do that
  764. arc SamWhited, that's why I offer commercial licenses. Or more specifically, licensed exceptions
  765. moparisthebest arc, add this to the list of reasons: https://opensource.google/docs/using/agpl-policy/ (sounds same as yours but it written form)
  766. SamWhited I'd ad that to the list of reasons against :) I have the same fear as an OSS dev doing my best to respect the wishes of other software authors. I want to respect their wishes, but what if I accidentally trigger the viral provision?
  767. arc I offer extremely competitively priced exceptions. The only discrimination is against military and military contractors.
  768. nyco has left
  769. SamWhited I do like the idea of offering commercial license exceptions
  770. arc Yeah then it's not exploitative anymore.
  771. moparisthebest > here I just wanna do my thing and not worry about licensing. that's another reason, I can use code licensed almost anything in an AGPLv3 project, so it's also handier for me
  772. moparisthebest meh, to be able to offer commercial exceptions you need CLAs which are equally sleazy
  773. SamWhited But fewer people can use my project, I don't want them to have to worry either. I just want it out there. Hopefully companies will toss me a couple of bucks on occasion, or I can have some other way to monetize it that doesn't also make OSS devs have to jump through hoops if they want to use it and aren't using something compatible
  774. arc Lately I've been increasingly using a cooperative model. People who contribute code get a share of whatever comes from that code.
  775. SamWhited arc: I'd be really curious how you handle that? I like the co-op model a lot which is why I tend to split the copyright among all contributors, but I don't really make any money on anything I work on outside of <dayjob> so I'd love to know how it works when there's an actual big community rpoject
  776. SamWhited On a tagentially related note: would anyone with a GitHub account help me prove a point about why github stars are a bad metric for anything by starring a repo of mine? (I will not be making any benefit from this, it's just to prove a point that my project with no contributions from anyone except me can have a lot of stars)
  777. SamWhited https://github.com/mellium/xmpp if anyone is willing.
  778. moparisthebest I also like the "high number of issues == low quality software" metric
  779. moparisthebest can't fix stupid I guess ? :'(
  780. SamWhited Exactly, basically the same thing.
  781. nyco has joined
  782. SamWhited When I was in school I did an internship with a defense contractor that gave raises based on the number of lines of code written in a git blame for the year. As you can imagine, it was the most ridiculously bloated software. All the stupid tricks like putting one argument per line even in small function calls would get called out in code review, but people still did things in stupid round about ways.
  783. neshtaxmpp has left
  784. lskdjf has joined
  785. moparisthebest I thought that kind of thing was a joke
  786. Andrzej has left
  787. moparisthebest at work we joke that the contractors must be getting paid by the line, even though we know they aren't...
  788. Zash Don't they know it's the inverse of that! Also popularity ≠ quality!!11! Aaaargh, how do you become a potato farmer?
  789. eta has left
  790. moparisthebest npm install potato-farmer ?
  791. SamWhited In this case it's popularity ≠ robust community. I started talking to someone from Open Colletive befor the FOSDEM call ended, so we're emailing to have the converation about why I think stars aren't anywhere close to their metric and my small project shouldn't have to jump through more hoops than a project that's equally small but a trendy tech and more people bookmarked it
  792. Mikaela has joined
  793. moparisthebest I thought stars were more like github-bookmarks
  794. SamWhited They are.
  795. mimi89999 has left
  796. moparisthebest like I have a couple hundred line arduino code snippets that haven't been touched since 2012 that I think might come in handy one day starred
  797. moparisthebest and, not things like curl, because I know where they are, and they are easy to find
  798. fuana has left
  799. fuana has joined
  800. chronosx88 has joined
  801. intosi has joined
  802. mdosch > I thought stars were more like github-bookmarks I use them like that. 😃
  803. SamWhited I think a lot of people do, but a lot also use it to say thanks when someone makes something they use, which is I think where the "it obviously means it's popular" comes from.
  804. chronosx88 has left
  805. moparisthebest yea I've never done that once, interesting
  806. moparisthebest I must have missed the "github: how to use stars" class
  807. SamWhited I mean, I think that's fine, I just don't think that means other people should attribute meaning to "100 stars" or whatever
  808. chronosx88 has joined
  809. Kev On a tagentially related note: would anyone with a PayPal account help me prove a point about why being rich is a bad metric for anything by sending me all their money? (I will not be making any benefit from this, it's just to prove a point ...)
  810. mathijs has left
  811. SamWhited Oh man, my scam just feels so armetureish now. Kev wins.
  812. mdosch Kev, prince of Nigeria…
  813. SamWhited (but in all seriousness, I am trying to convince Open Collective to come up with some metric other than GitHub stars)
  814. mdosch What would be a good metric?
  815. Kev There isn’t one? :)
  816. SamWhited Yah, I think it's got ot be something you determine individually, not by something specific to a code hosting service
  817. intosi has left
  818. SamWhited Maybe a mix of unique contributors, activity over time (including having multiple people consitsently active), etc.?
  819. Kev It also depends what you’re trying to measure. Quality, or ease of access as a contributor?
  820. Kev If it’s the former, number of contributors isn’t a particularly good metric. If the latter, it may well be.
  821. SamWhited I think they're trying to measure the health of the community
  822. chronosx88 has left
  823. Kev Your suggestions sound like a reasonable way to think about that then, yes. I assumed it was something project-related.
  824. chronosx88 has joined
  825. SamWhited Sorry, should have explained up front. Open Collective accepts projects into their fiscal host only if they have >100 stars on GitHub. I believe that is a bad metric. I said so as the "controversial opinion" question in a call earlier and someone form Open Collective reached out and asked if I was talking about them and why I thought it was a bad idea
  826. mimi89999 has joined
  827. SamWhited So I thought before I sent an email I'd try and get my project with literally no community up to that number and link them to it and a few others I know that are at or close to that.
  828. lionelexecrec has joined
  829. lionelexecrec has left
  830. adiaholic has joined
  831. lionelexecrec has joined
  832. mdosch Afair I even got a star on github for a repo that was automatically cloned into my account when I just PRed something minor like a typo. 🙂
  833. chronosx88 has left
  834. intosi has joined
  835. chronosx88 has joined
  836. lionelexecrec has left
  837. lionelexecrec has joined
  838. Mikaela has left
  839. eta has joined
  840. lionelexecrec has left
  841. lionelexecrec has joined
  842. chronosx88 has left
  843. fuana has left
  844. fuana has joined
  845. lionelexecrec has left
  846. lionelexecrec has joined
  847. lskdjf has left
  848. lskdjf has joined
  849. chronosx88 has joined
  850. lionelexecrec has left
  851. lionelexecrec has joined
  852. fuana has left
  853. intosi has left
  854. mathijs has joined
  855. adiaholic has left
  856. Andrzej has joined
  857. chronosx88 has left
  858. chronosx88 has joined
  859. floretta has left
  860. floretta has joined
  861. Mikaela has joined
  862. lionelexecrec has left
  863. lionelexecrec has joined
  864. lionelexecrec has left
  865. lionelexecrec has joined
  866. Daniel has left
  867. lionelexecrec has left
  868. lionelexecrec has joined
  869. lionelexecrec has left
  870. Andrzej has left
  871. lionelexecrec has joined
  872. lionelexecrec has left
  873. lionelexecrec has joined
  874. lionelexecrec has left
  875. lionelexecrec has joined
  876. fuana has joined
  877. lionelexecrec has left
  878. Andrzej has joined
  879. fuana has left
  880. fuana has joined
  881. lionelexecrec has joined
  882. chronosx88 has left
  883. chronosx88 has joined
  884. fuana has left
  885. Daniel has joined
  886. lionelexecrec has left
  887. lionelexecrec has joined
  888. lionelexecrec has left
  889. lionelexecrec has joined
  890. lionelexecrec has left
  891. lionelexecrec has joined
  892. Andrzej has left
  893. alacer has left
  894. lionelexecrec has left
  895. lionelexecrec has joined
  896. alacer has joined
  897. alacer has left
  898. fuana has joined
  899. mimi89999 has left
  900. arc has left
  901. arc has joined
  902. fuana has left
  903. fuana has joined
  904. fuana has left
  905. neshtaxmpp has joined
  906. Andrzej has joined
  907. mimi89999 has joined
  908. Mikaela has left
  909. werdan has joined
  910. Andrzej has left
  911. andy has left
  912. arc has left
  913. adiaholic has joined
  914. antranigv has left
  915. intosi has joined
  916. mimi89999 has left
  917. mimi89999 has joined
  918. chronosx88 has left
  919. papatutuwawa has left
  920. Andrzej has joined
  921. werdan has left
  922. intosi has left
  923. intosi has joined
  924. lskdjf has left
  925. goffi has left
  926. goffi has joined
  927. purplebeetroot has joined
  928. Andrzej has left
  929. lorddavidiii has joined
  930. millesimus has joined
  931. millesimus has left
  932. alameyo has left
  933. stpeter has joined
  934. stpeter has left
  935. goffi has left
  936. Andrzej has joined
  937. Tobias has left
  938. Andrzej has left
  939. jcbrand has left
  940. stpeter has joined
  941. stpeter has left
  942. intosi has left
  943. lskdjf has joined
  944. emus has left
  945. emus has joined
  946. lskdjf has left
  947. marek has left