- Members - XMPP

Agenda for the XSF Board Meeting on August 27 2026

by Guus der Kinderen

Dear Board members, This email announces the agenda for our next Board meeting, scheduled for Thursday, 27 August 2026, from 16:00 to 16:30 UTC. The meeting will take place in the XSF chatroom at xmpp:xsf@muc.xmpp.org?join. Three consecutive meetings did not proceed (2026-07-02 opened but deferred its only substantive item; 2026-07-16 and 2026-08-13 were cancelled). This agenda therefore presents a candidate list of outstanding items rather than a fixed agenda. The Board selects from it under item 2. Items not selected are recorded as deferred in the minutes and carry forward to the next meeting. I'm aware that the agenda below uses plenty of markup, which may affect rendering. The same agenda is available on the XSF wiki, which may be helpful in case your mail client does not render this email as intended: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Board-Meeting-2026-08-271. *Welcome*Opening of the meeting. Roll call and confirmation of quorum. 2. *Formalize Agenda*The Board selects which of the candidate items below will be taken today. Given the 30-minute slot, realistically two. *Recommendation*: items A1 and A2, on the basis that A1 is now decidable and A2 costs almost nothing. Items under section C are assignments requiring no meeting time and can be confirmed without discussion. Any Board member may promote an item from B or C into today's agenda, or add an item not listed. Absent objection, the recommendation stands. Items not selected are deferred, not dropped. The minutes will record the deferred set. Section A - recommended for today *A1. Jabber Trademark Sublicensing Program* *(20 min - decision)*Deferred from 2026-07-02 pending community feedback. That feedback arrived: the discussion ran on members@ through July and has since concluded. *What changed* - The full Enforcement Agreement, including Exhibit A (the Jabber Trademark Position Statement), is now published on the XSF website. Exhibit A previously went unnoticed - Read as a set, the documents show the administration arrangement the XSF operates was structured as a twelve-month trial, ending either in transfer of the Mark to the JSF or in reversion of administration to JINC. The Mark was never transferred. - Peter Saint-Andre confirms the arrangement was extended in practice, that he holds no documentation of the extension, and that he found nothing further in his own files. - The License Agreement §5 expressly prohibits sublicensing by the JSF. *Positions raised* - *Peter*: do not carry sublicensing authority to a successor EU entity; future applicants license directly with Cisco. Notes that requests have been very rare since the initial flood in 2004-2006. - *Ralph*: existing licenses are perpetual subject to good conduct; cleanest route to certainty is a letter from Cisco recognising the new entity as successor. - *Georg*: in order of preference: (1) retain a stub XSF-US to issue sublicenses; (2) wind down with a final registration window; (3) plain wind-down. Notes Cisco recently renewed the mark and still ships Jabber-branded products. - *Jonas*, as a license holder: clarify the status of existing uses before XSF-US winds down; if it cannot be clarified, holders must be told to seek Cisco's blessing. - *Travis*: stop advertising the program immediately. *Decisions sought* 1. Whether sublicensing authority will be carried over to a successor entity. 2. Whether to commit to a notification process for existing holders, and on what timeline. 3. Whether to suspend or annotate the public sublicensing pages pending (1). *Dependency*: no application can be filed while trademark(a)xmpp.org is bouncing. See C1. Background: https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/jabber-trademark/background/ Approved applications: https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/jabber-trademark/approved-applications/ Mailing list thread: https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/message/AXQGRXYXSK… *A2. EU Legal Structure: self-assessments have stalled* *(5 min - decision)*The Board agreed on 18 June that authors would self-assess "before a date to be communicated". The call went out on 4 June; no date was ever communicated. Nearly three months on, no self-assessment has been posted to members@. *Decisions sought* 1. A firm deadline. 2. Whether to contact the proposal authors directly rather than via the list. 3. What happens to proposals whose authors do not respond - Board-prepared assessment, or drop from consideration. Wiki page: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/XSF_EU_Legal_Transition_Proposal Mailing list thread: https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/message/O4RR4XQ53S… Section B - candidate items, deferred unless promoted *B1. Access to legal expertise* *(15 min - decision)*The Board recorded on 18 June that several points on the trademark programme require legal confirmation: the status of existing licensees if the programme lapses, reversibility, and any transfer to a successor entity. No advice has been obtained since. In May, on standards@, Matija Šuklje offered assistance. He specialises in IPR, specifically copyright and FOSS licensing, and co-authored the FLA. He was explicit that he is not an attorney and cannot provide Legal Advice as such, but offered his thoughts once the XSF has a rough idea what it wants to achieve. The offer was acknowledged on-list but never taken up. He remains active in the community. *Decisions sought* 1. Whether to take up the offer, and who owns the interaction. 2. The set of questions to put - spanning the trademark position, transferability of XSF obligations to a successor entity, and the IPR questions in B3. 3. Whether an informal read precedes or replaces a decision on paid counsel, and what would trigger the latter. Mailing list post: https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/standards@xmpp.org/message/W6UUNLIP… *B2. Volunteer capacity* *(15 min - discussion)*Guus wrote on standards@ in July that the volunteering force is one of the XSF's most valuable assets, that the XSF has not historically done well at preventing burnout among those volunteers, and that it needs to do better. Two signals from that discussion bear on this directly: - Goffi described himself as "already at the edge of burn-out" and declined additional work on that basis. - Goffi reported, and Kev independently described, that the Editor has indicated he could not continue in the role if the volume of low-quality submissions rises. Neither account is a first-hand statement, and neither was contested on the list. The XSF's volunteer force is not within the Council's remit. This item exists because no other body owns it. *For discussion* 1. What concrete support the Editor and Council need, and whether the Board can supply or fund it. 2. Whether the Editor function has sufficient redundancy. 3. Whether the Board should adopt any ongoing practice for noticing volunteer load before it becomes attrition. *B3. IPR policy: warranty, copyright, and AI-assisted contributions* *(20 min - decision)*Goffi has asked three times whether this belongs with the Board - twice in May, and again in July, when he asked whether the discussion should continue on standards@ or whether the Board should take it up and ask a team to work on an XSF statement on AI use. That question remains unanswered. Guus, as a Board member, twice replied that the matter was not yet ready, and set out what would change that: a concrete proposal with prior art behind it. The prior-art survey is now complete. Whether a concrete proposal exists is for the Board to judge. *The narrow question* Marvin argued on standards@ that AI-generated content cannot comply with the IPR policy as written: §3.1 requires the author to assign ownership they may not hold, and §4 requires a copyright notice that may be invalid. Dave argued the warranty model already indemnifies the XSF, since the author asserts they can assign and the XSF accepts in good faith. *Alternatives raised* - Retain the current policy unchanged. - Adopt submitter wording along the lines Dave proposed: an assertion and warranty that, to the extent copyright exists in the contribution, the submitter has permission from all rights holders to assign it, and does so. - Adopt a matching qualification in Appendix C. Dave himself was unsure this is necessary, on the basis that publishing a submission likely suffices. - Disclaim copyright in XEPs entirely and require submissions to do the same. Reported by Dave as a position Peter has argued previously; not stated by Peter in this thread. *Decisions sought* 1. Whether the current IPR policy is adequate as written, or is to be opened. 2. If opened, which direction, and who drafts. 3. Whether any XSF-wide statement is commissioned beyond Council's XEP-0143 work, and a reply to Goffi either way. *Scope note*: author-facing guidance belongs in XEP-0143 and is Council's. PR #1552 is with Council, where revised wording was proposed at the most recent Council meeting. The Board should not duplicate that work. Mailing list thread: https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/standards@xmpp.org/thread/TEATGPR45… Prior art: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/AI_contribution_policies_in_other_projects XEP-0143 PR #1552: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1552 Section C - assignments, no meeting time required *Confirm owners without discussion unless someone objects.* *C1. Role address audit.*trademark(a)xmpp.org has been reported bouncing since June; no sublicense application can be filed while it is broken. The Board agreed on 18 June that this should be addressed; it appears not to have been. The CoC also publishes no contact address for the Board or conduct team. Confirm every XSF role address is monitored and published. *Owner: TBD* *C2. Counsel enquiry.*Peter offered in July to raise the question of counsel on the open-source foundations list. Status unknown; confirm. *Owner: TBD* *C3. Summit 29 topic suggestion.*Topic suggestions close today. Anyone may suggest a topic; this requires no Board decision. If any Board member wants intake reform or the role of Council discussed on 4-5 September, they should post to the list directly. Daniel has already proposed a related topic. *No Board action required - noted for awareness* Standing items 3. *Any Other Business (AOB)* *(5 min)* - *XMPP Summit 29 *: 4-5 September 2026, online - the first online-only Summit: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Conferences/Summit_29 4. *Date of next meeting*Proposed: Thursday, 10 September 2026, at the usual time. Note the membership meeting on 3 September and Summit 29 on 4-5 September fall before it. The Board may also wish to confirm the timeline for the annual meeting and Board and Council elections, given the current term is designated 2025-2026. 5. *Close* Please review the relevant materials ahead of the meeting so that we can use our time efficiently. Kind regards, Guus

4 days, 9 hours

1
0
0 0

voting update

by Alexander Gnauck

According to my records the following XSF members have voted via proxy in the current voting period: * daniel (at) gultsch.de * jabber (at) larma.de * kevin.smith (at) isode.com * polarian (at) icebound.dev * travis (at) burtrum.org * dele.olajide (at) igniterealtime.org * daniel (at) spacecloud.one * mario (at) sabatino.pro * nicoco (at) nicoco.fr * jonas (at) wielicki.name * georg (at) yax.im * gnauck (at) conversations.im If you have not yet voted, please send a message to xmpp:memberbot@xmpp.org. If you have problems with memberbot please contact me directly by email or xmpp. Thanks, Alex

6 days, 6 hours

1
0
0 0

29th XMPP Summit

by Daniel Gultsch

Good morning the 29th XMPP Summit is fast approaching. It is our first attempt at an online only Summit and will be held on Friday 4 September and Saturday 5 September 2026. If you intent to attend please add yourself to the participants list¹. Adding yourself might also motivate others to participate itself. Please find the time to do so even if there is no "limited seating" or other constraints. We are also looking for topic suggestions. We will maintain the unconference style of offline summits (meaning participants can bring their own topics) but for time constraints we will do the topic suggestions and topic sorting ahead of time. Meaning what usually happens on the white board in the first hour of a traditional summit will now happen on list. Please go ahead and propose topics and include a short pitch. Additionally please add the topic to the wiki.² (If you someone only suggests it here I’ll try my best to add it to the wiki myself.) I will close the topic suggestion round on Thursday 27th so we will have about a week to vote on the topics. (which will determine the order of the four topics we'll be discussing during the Summit) cheers Daniel ¹: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Conferences/Summit_29#Participants ²: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Conferences/Summit_29#Proposed_Topics

1 week, 5 days

1
1
0 0

OFFICIAL MEETING ANNOUNCEMENT

by Alexander Gnauck

I've started proxy voting via xmpp:memberbot@xmpp.org on the membership applications listed here: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Membership_Applications_Q3_2026 We will hold a member meeting on September 3rd, 2026 to formally approve the voting results. The meeting particulars are: Date: September 3, 2026 Time: 19.00 UTC Location: xmpp:xsf@muc.xmpp.org When you have problems with memberbot please contact my directly by email or xmpp. Alex

2 weeks

1
0
0 0

Membership Application period Q3 2026

by Alexander Gnauck

Hello, I have created the membership application page for Q3 2026 at: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Membership_Applications_Q3_2026 The following XSF members have to reapply: * Gonzalo Raúl Nemmi * Travis Burtrum * Severino Ferrer de la Peñita * Timothée Jaussoin * Trevor Krahn * Ralph Meijer * Edwin Mons * Emmanuel Gil Peyrot * Peter Saint-Andre * Holger Weiß * Gideon White * Natalie Wirth * Marvin Wissfeld Regards, Alex

4 weeks

1
1
0 0

Re: Jabber Trademark Sublicensing agreement. Was: Re: Re: XSF EU Legal Structure - Help us define evaluation criteria

by Ralph Meijer

Aren't these the same documents that are already linked on the background page? I think the thing missing is an agreement that permits the sublicensing by the JSF/XSF. On 2 July 2026 18:11:22 CEST, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter(a)stpeter.im> wrote: >Attached please find scanned copies of: > >- A letter of intent between Jabber Inc. and the Jabber Software Foundation, dated December 16, 2002 >- A trademark licensing agreement between Jabber Inc. and the Jabber Software Foundation, dated March 7, 2003 >- A trademark enforcement agreement between Jabber Inc. and the Jabber Software Foundation, dated May 2, 2003 > >For the avoidance of doubt, I believe that these are the only documents I have on file (in a locked, fireproof safe at my house) related to the trademark licensing agreement. For example, I do not believe that I have any documents on file related to affirmation that Cisco Systems Inc. would honor the trademark licensing agreement upon its acquisition of Jabber Inc. on Halloween, 2008. It is possible that such documents exist, but I would need to do more digging in order to find them. > >I would most appreciate it if someone would be so kind as to submit a PR against the XSF website so that these documents will be publicly available there. > >Peter > >On Tue, Jun 30, 2026, at 9:50 AM, Ralph Meijer wrote: >> On 04/06/2026 15.50, Dave Cridland wrote: >>> [..] >>> Very specifically on these, I think it would be useful to classify the IPR and related assets that the existing XSF has. My non-exhaustive guesswork gives me: >>> >>> [..] >>> * Trademark licences (I think the XSF has a trademark licence for Jabber, though I can't find it) >> >> This document can be found here <https://xmpp.org/docs/Trademark_License_Agreement.pdf>, as linked from <https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/jabber-trademark/background/>. Note that this document specifically disallows sublicensing, but read on below. >> >>> * Trademark sublicensor: https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/jabber-trademark/ >> >> Even though the JabberⓇ Trademark License Agreement clearly asserts that there is an agreement between the XSF and Cisco to offer a sublicensing program, we do not currently have any public document that explicitly shows this. I've been working with Peter to assess the relevant documents and whether we can make them publicly available. If so, we will make sure to add them to this section of the XSF website. >> >> I will provide an update when I have more to share. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Ralph >>

1 month

10
23
0 0

Agenda for the XSF Board Meeting on July 2 2026

by Guus der Kinderen

Dear Board members, This email announces the agenda for our next Board meeting, scheduled for Thursday, 2 July 2026, from 16:00 to 16:30 UTC. The meeting will take place in the XSF chatroom at xmpp:xsf@muc.xmpp.org?join. Brief context is included for each agenda item to support preparation. *1. Welcome*Opening of the meeting. *2. Formalize Agenda*Confirm and approve the agenda for this meeting. *3. Jabber Trademark Sublicensing Program*Continue the discussion from the previous meeting following the agreed mailing list discussion and any progress on outstanding action items. The Board is invited to review any community feedback, the status of the trademark@ mailbox, and any legal clarification obtained since the last meeting. Mailing list messages: - https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/message/AOSPQYJACO… - https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/message/XR4MEQMIYK… - https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/message/MIOABW77NC… *4. Any Other Business (AOB)*Items not listed above that require brief attention. *5. Date of next meeting*Agreement on the date of the next Board meeting. *6. Close*Closing of the meeting. Please review the relevant materials ahead of the meeting so that we can use our time efficiently. Kind regards, Guus

2 months

1
0
0 0

XSF EU Legal Structure - Help us define evaluation criteria

by Guus der Kinderen

Dear XSF members, This email is the next step in the ongoing work on a potential EU legal structure for the XSF. To recap where we are: in December, the Board asked for volunteers to investigate lightweight options for an EU presence [1]. In February, example proposals were shared on the wiki and opened for community feedback [2]. Many members participated in that discussion (thanks!) and five proposals are now documented: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/XSF_EU_Legal_Transition_Proposal - The proposals cover a range of approaches, from full EU reconstitution to structural simplification, to more lightweight options. At today's Board meeting, we concluded that the proposals give us a good foundation, but that we are not yet in a position to rank or narrow them reliably. What is missing is a shared evaluation framework: without agreeing on what matters most, any comparison risks being arbitrary. The Board's proposed next step is therefore to define a set of evaluation criteria first, and then use those as a yardstick to assess the proposals. We would like your input on that list of criteria before the Board finalises it at the next meeting on 21 May. Below is an initial draft. We are not asking you to evaluate the proposals yet, only to help us refine this list: - Governance & Member Control - evaluates how decisions are made within the organization, including the roles of members and the board and how voting rights are allocated. - Legal & Regulatory Complexity - considers the requirements and processes for forming and maintaining the entity under the laws of the chosen jurisdiction, including compliance, reporting, and language obligations. - IP & Asset Transfer Feasibility - looks at how easily intellectual property, trademarks, and other assets can be transferred to or managed within the proposed structure. - Transition Cost & Operational Overhead - assesses estimated setup costs, ongoing administrative responsibilities, and any additional operational effort required to implement the structure. - International Orientation & Reach - considers how well the structure accommodates contributors, members, and operations across multiple countries. - Continuity & Long-Term Sustainability - evaluates whether the structure can support ongoing operations smoothly during and after any transition, including maintaining organizational stability. - Financial Flexibility & Funding Options - examines whether the structure allows XSF to manage finances effectively, including holding funds, receiving donations, or engaging in grants or other funding mechanisms. - Flexibility for Future Changes - assesses whether the structure can adapt to changes in membership, governance, operations, or jurisdictional requirements without requiring a complete reorganization. - Risk & Liability Management - looks at how the structure addresses legal, financial, and operational risks, including liability exposure for board members, contributors, and the organization itself. - Alignment with Strategic Goals - evaluates how the proposed structure supports XSF's overall mission, objectives, and long-term strategic direction. Specifically, we would welcome your thoughts on: 1. Are there important criteria missing from this list? 2. Are any of the listed criteria redundant or not relevant to our situation? 3. Which criteria do you consider most important? The Board will use the feedback from this thread at the next meeting (21 May) to agree on a final, ordered list of criteria. We will then use that list to structure a more focused evaluation of the proposals. Please reply to this thread by 19 May if possible, to give the Board time to review input before the meeting. Thanks in advance for your time and thoughts. Kind regards, Guus [1] https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/thread/UBVF332GN63… [2] https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/thread/5OS3L2D4EH6…

2 months

5
9
0 0

Agenda for the XSF Board Meeting on June 18 2026

by Guus der Kinderen

Dear Board members, This email announces the agenda for our next Board meeting, scheduled for Thursday, 18 June 2026, from 16:00 to 16:30 UTC. The meeting will take place in the XSF chatroom at xmpp:xsf@muc.xmpp.org?join. Brief context is included for each agenda item to support preparation. *1. Welcome*Opening of the meeting. *2. Formalize Agenda*Confirm and approve the agenda for this meeting. *3. Jabber Trademark Sublicensing Program*The XSF administers JABBER sublicensing on Cisco's behalf (Cisco owns the mark). The program is near-dormant (most uses date to 2004-2006). Decision sought: direction on whether to continue it or wind it down in a controlled way (notify Cisco; new applicants would then license directly). Note this can be decided independently of the EU-relocation question. Key points 1. Is there any current demand? 2. Existing license-holders' status if it lapses - needs legal confirmation. 3. Reversibility - re-establishing with Cisco later may be hard. 4. Option to simply ask Cisco whether they want to keep the arrangement. Direction sought, not a binding decision - several points require legal advice. Mailing list messages: - https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/message/AOSPQYJACO… - https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/message/XR4MEQMIYK… - https://mail.jabber.org/hyperkitty/list/members@xmpp.org/message/MIOABW77NC… *4. Any Other Business (AOB)*Items not listed above that require brief attention. *5. Date of next meeting*Agreement on the date of the next Board meeting. *6. Close*Closing of the meeting. Please review the relevant materials ahead of the meeting so that we can use our time efficiently. Kind regards, Guus

2 months, 2 weeks

3
4
0 0

XMPP presence at OmniOpenCon - call for support

by Polarian

Hey, Find the details below: Date: 16th October to 18th October 2026 Location: Bucharest, Romania Venue: Politehnica University The organiser of the conference responded back to me today offering a stand for XMPP. My plan is to bring a few phones and laptops, and show the XMPP experience. Along with stealing ralph's idea from FOSDEM and have a SBC on the table running a proof of concept chat service. Then have stickers and potentially leaflets like usual, will liason with commteams to see if they have anything we could print and handout. I have one person who has contacted me willing to help out, this email is a call for involvement, if you are able to attend the conference and give a hand, please let me know either on list, off list or on XMPP (my JID is within the email signature). I have yet to confirm the stand, however I am more than happy to run this one just 2 people. The more the merrier though, Bucharest for Westerners is cheap, and its a nice city to visit. Thanks, -- Polarian Jabber/XMPP: polarian(a)icebound.dev

2 months, 3 weeks

2
1
0 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

Members