XSF Discussion - 2021-08-26


  1. dwd

    .

  2. arc

    !

  3. MattJ

    ?

  4. dwd

    ¡

  5. Zash

  6. arc

    ...

  7. MattJ

    Quorum, at least. ralphm?

  8. arc

    Do you want to chair?

  9. MattJ

    Not particularly, but I can :)

  10. dwd

    MattJ, Tell you what, you chair and I'll do minutes.

  11. MattJ

    Trello looks like it needs a sweep, some old stuff there. I think the two items on my radar are approving the fiscal host stuff, and the recent PR for XEP-0001 (rename Draft stage -> Stable)

  12. MattJ

    0) Roll call

  13. dwd

    I'm here.

  14. MattJ

    I think we're here

  15. MattJ

    Anyone else with items for the agenda?

  16. dwd

    Sadly not, though I do need to find some time for that CoC again.

  17. MattJ

    1) Fiscal host policies

  18. MattJ

    As far as I know this is still outstanding. Has anyone not reviewed it who still wants to? It's been dragging on for a bit.

  19. MattJ

    https://pad.disroot.org/p/XSF_Fiscal_Host_Rules fwiw

  20. dwd

    I suggest we write a post on members@ with the rules in, and ask for any last comments.

  21. MattJ

    I can do that

  22. MattJ

    2) Renaming 'Draft' stage to 'Stable' in XEP-0001

  23. MattJ

    PR at https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1100

  24. ralphm

    Still on holiday. Back next week

  25. MattJ

    No worries ralphm, enjoy :)

  26. MattJ

    jonas’, any comments from Editors?

  27. dwd

    I'm actually find with this rename. Draft was a copy of the IETF's "Draft" stage, which itself has disappeared.

  28. dwd

    I'm actually fine with this rename. Draft was a copy of the IETF's "Draft" stage, which itself has disappeared.

  29. dwd

    So it's now even harder to explain. Calling it "Stable" seems to convey what it needs to.

  30. jonas’

    MattJ, no comment from the editors, except that the technical implementation will probably keep Draft in some non-website-visible places for technical reasons.

  31. MattJ

    wfm

  32. jonas’

    I sent comments from Council to board@, did those arrive?

  33. MattJ

    Oh yes, I did see that, thanks

  34. MattJ

    Okay, I motion we adopt this change to XEP-0001

  35. MattJ

    +1 from me

  36. ralphm

    Without context, I still approve. +1

  37. ralphm good back in holiday mode

  38. ralphm

    Goes

  39. MattJ

    2/4

  40. dwd

    Oh, sorry. +1.

  41. MattJ

    arc, ?

  42. arc

    +1

  43. MattJ

    Great

  44. MattJ

    I think that's everything then. AOB?

  45. jonas’

    hm

  46. jonas’

    should someone have asked members@ or standards@ on the Stable vs. Draft thing?

  47. arc

    We seem to have already voted on it

  48. jonas’

    🤷

  49. MattJ

    If we want to make sure there are no concrete objections, I can send a note out about this too (and say, delay merging the PR by a week)

  50. jonas’

    I won't touch the PR anyway until tuesday, so that would definitely work for me

  51. MattJ

    Okay, assuming no other business

  52. MattJ

    3) Date of next +1W

  53. MattJ

    4) The End

  54. Zash

    `<fin/>`

  55. jonas’

    MattJ (or whomelse may chair): to avoid those awkward pauses, Council has moved to letting everyone raise their AOB during the meeting (thanks asynchronous text chat!), so I typically only break for like 15s or so when the AOB section comes up and then contniue.

  56. jonas’

    MattJ (or whomelse may chair): to avoid those awkward pauses, Council has moved to letting everyone raise their AOB during the meeting (thanks asynchronous text chat!), so I typically only break for like 15s or so when the AOB section comes up and then continue.

  57. MattJ

    Board meetings are defined by their awkward pauses

  58. jonas’

    oh no, I hope we didn't destroy a tradition there with council

  59. MattJ

    Heh

  60. dwd

    Thanks MattJ.

  61. arc

    Thx

  62. mdosch

    > Expenses must be have been pre-approved by the treasurer. https://pad.disroot.org/p/XSF_Fiscal_Host_Rules Might any native speaker check this sentence? For me it seems like the it should be _have been_ instead of _be have been_.

  63. Zash

    Either of "must {be,have been} pre-approved" makes sense I think

  64. Zash

    I guess depending on the tense used in the rest of the text

  65. mdosch

    Then I'd go for _must be pre-approved_.

  66. mdosch

    But I leave this to the native speakers, but the _be must have been_ just doesn't make sense for me.

  67. mdosch

    But maybe this is something very british as I often fail to parse very british texts. :D

  68. me9

    'must be have been' can't work. And 'must have been' sounds weird. 'have to have been' would maybe work. 'must be' sounds good.

  69. Zash

    If you can't read whatever syntax that is, I meant "must be pre-approved" and "must have been pre-approved" both work, right?

  70. me9

    I can and I say your second option sounds weird. But maybe it works? 'must be' definitely does work.

  71. Zash

    Not a native speaker but both sound sane to me.

  72. me9

    Mhm.

  73. Zash

    Slightly different meanings tho, something vs past tense

  74. me9

    True. As you already said, it depends on the rest.

  75. theTedd

    "must be have been" is wrong (likely just a composition change mid-sentence); "must be pre-approved" is correct; "must have been pre-approved" is also correct, but.. funny; "have to have been" is clunky but in too common usage

  76. theTedd

    I'd go with "must be pre-approved" or "must have been approved", depending on required meaning

  77. mdosch

    > If you can't read whatever syntax that is, I meant "must be pre-approved" and "must have been pre-approved" both work, right? That's how I understood it.

  78. emus

    Not late enough for the end of month XMPP Newsletter reminder 🙂 Please add your project news. You can simply add it via this pad: https://yopad.eu/p/xmpp-newsletter-365days Last addition from August accepted till 2nd of September. Release is planned by 5th of September. Good night to most of you!