XSF Discussion - 2021-04-15

In https://xmpp.org/registrar/disco-categories.html#account there's an identity for anonymous accounts. Anyone think it would be useful to have a server-level feature or identity meaning "all users here are anonymous users"?

Normally such hosts aren't federated, or very limited, but if they're not it might be handy for e.g. a MUC to know.

I wonder if we are going to have a board meeting this morning? Ralphm

Tagging for alert only

Meeting time?

Here o/

Two of us!

ralphm, dwd?

MattJ how is your work been going?

Hiya, sorry.

.

0. Welcome

Hi!

(my client was acting up)

Looks like we are all here this week!

Yay

Agenda items?

arc, fine thanks :)

Well we have the old business with the CoC etc

Right

Anything else?

Mea culpa, my impending large amounts of free time have acted in opposition to actually getting the CoC etc done.

We could revisit the topic on acting as a fiscal host

Ok, let's get start and see what else pops up.

1. Minute Taker

I think that's arc.

Yeah it's my turn.

2. CoC, etc. As per dwd's comment above, let's punt on this one.

3. XSF as fiscal host

I've seen Sam having sent an e-mail to Peter and Peter mentions to 'need a think', but suggests working with Open Collective as they have infra and process in place.

My feeling is that Open Collective would be preferable, it's literally what they are built for

How many people said it’d be useful (and were they in a region Open Collective would support), BTW (just roughly)?

Sam, are you around?

I would not imagine that is a situation where people are waiting on us, but rather, having the right process in place is important for when people are needing it

There's a degree of "build it and they will come".

Fairy narfs.

I agree. And I would like to see the XSF be more proactive in this area, proposing projects that could be funded, for example

That all sounds sensible.

So I guess the motion is to proceed to work with the Open Collective to get this going?

I guess I would second such a motion

Ok, making that a motion

+1

+1

+1

+1

(Still somewhat predicated on the Treasurer saying it sounds sensible)

Motion carries.

Agreed dwd

We still need to figure out the actual process. My hope was that Sam was interested in working with Peter on this further.

works for meet

me*

yay

3. AOB

?

None here

Nice and quick then.

4. Date of Next

+1W

5. Close

Thanks all!

Thanks!

(sorry, just saw the "are you around")

To (belatedly) answer Kev's question, I got one response to my question on the list and it was from someone who said their company is already a company so they don't need this sort of thing

Oh, and one person volunteered their organizations as hosts in other countries and one person said they might potentially be interested

And maybe there are also many that havent read this message. Sam, if I can help you with sonthing particular on the "actual process" - let me know

Again I think this is more of a build it and they will come situation. Typically when a project realizes they need a fiscal sponsor, they're going to look, make a decision, and choose one. They are unlikely to act on it until they need to, and they are more unlikely wait around for the "right one" to come into existence.

Part of the reason we have fiscal sponsors is we, as developers, hate doing legal and financial paperwork because it is largely a waste of time.. and when we have to do it, we try to get it done quickly.

Well, one could state the other way round, if there is no institution the project may not be realized or continued. And waiting until XSF provides that will also take long

Apart from this:

Hello everyone, I know I'm late, but now its mid of month - time for the new newsletter draft! 🎉️ And time for your commits, news and updates! ✍️ https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/914 Online pad: https://yopad.eu/p/xmpp-newsletter-365days