[Standards] Fwd: Minutes 2010-03-15

Kevin Smith kevin at kismith.co.uk
Thu Mar 18 09:41:04 CDT 2010


FYI:


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kevin Smith
Date: Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:40 PM
Subject: Minutes 2010-03-15
To: XMPP Council


Minutes for the Council meeting 2010-03-15

Logs: http://xmpp.org:5290/muc_log/muc.xmpp.org/council/100315/

1) Roll call
Kev, Matt and Remko present, Ralph absent.

2) Agenda bashing
Voting period discussion added.

3) XEP-0136: Message Archiving version 1.2rc1
http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0136-1.2.html
Diff: http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0136/diff/1.1/vs/1.2rc1
Accept changes?

Kev, Matt, Remko, Ralph to vote onlist before 29th March

4) XEP Notes.
Should we have some comments attached to XEPs and proto-XEPs by Council?
Cases in point: server ip check, Software information.

Discussion (see logs) about this, rough agreement that there are
circumstances (particularly reasons for rejecting changes, or
rejecting protoXEPs) where it's useful to persist Council opinion.
Also agreement that this helps re-enforce that Council must justify
rejections. Also potentially helpful when accepting a protoXEP, where
Council don't block acceptance, but do have comments that need to be
incorporated before Draft.

5) XEP-0232 / software information: this was recently deferred for
inactivity but there is still interest in moving this forward. Can the
Council review it again and more clearly specify its objections?

Searching through mailing list logs, we couldn't find any previous
objections to the latest changes.

6) XEP-0193 / multiple resources per stream: several people have
expressed an interest in bring back this feature (which was removed
from rfc3920bis). Is the Council receptive to taking this on?

Discussion that this could belong in a new XEP.

7) Review periods.

Discussion about Council -1 votes and blocking XEPs. Agreement that
some issues can't be resolved and so permanent -1s are possible, but
that the usual case needs to be that Council members objecting clearly
specify their objections, with hopefully suggestions for overcoming
them. Peter noted that XEP-0060 (pubsub) currently has a -1 vote
against it from Ralph, but the follow-up mail to the list explaining
this hasn't come, so Peter (the XEP author) can't address the issues.
Agreement that if Council can't specify their objections to XEP
changes within a fortnight of the end of the voting period, the -1
vote should become a +-0.

8) Peter would like feedback on filetransfer things.

To happen onlist or directly if people are interested.

9) Date of next meeting
2010-03-22 19:00 GMT

10) Any other business.
None

Fini.

/K


More information about the Standards mailing list