28 Aug
2025
28 Aug
'25
11:21 a.m.
Moving away from GitHub will take a not-to-be-underestimated amount of
effort and dedication. A couple of years ago, there was an experiment with
moving away from GitHub to GitLab. Quite some effort has been put into
that, but in the end, it didn't take off. The remnants are still accessible
at https://gitlab.com/xsf
My estimation is that we have less volunteer-resources available today. As
such, I don't see how we would realistically pull off a migration, let
alone start to maintain that new infrastructure. I'm happy to be proven
wrong.
As I am skeptical that this will ever successfully happen, I urge Board to
find a compromise (with regards to Florian's -1 vote) to let the item under
vote pass. Please decouple the effort to improve the workload in existing
processes (which is taxing people that have been and still are volunteering
today) from a migration effort. One should not need to block the other.
- Guus
On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 8:51 AM Ralph Meijer <ralphm(a)ik.nu> wrote:
On 28 August 2025 02:35:04 CEST, Elle <
elle+xmpp-standards(a)weathered-steel.dev> wrote:
- The communications platform *is* apolitical. It
does not distinguish
between "bad" things (like enabling C&C systems
for malware) and "good"
things (like rapid triage of pressure sores). So people use it for both.
We'll just have to agree to disagree here. My point about OMEMO is that
the UK
and a number of other countries have just passed legislation that
aims to backdoor all E2EE communication platforms. Like it or not, refusing
to backdoor OMEMO will become an explicitly political position, along with
its current technical and ethical underpinnings.
Regardless of its applied usage, the point is like you said for the
server
operators / protocol to be ignorant of the contents of E2EE
messages. While there may be attacks outside the protocol, the XSF is
entering into an ethical stance that it will not knowingly compromise the
security of OMEMO. At least, I hope XSF makes this commitment.""
The "Four Horseman of the Cryptocalypse" is a classic line of argument,
I'm sure you're aware, used to strip people of their civil
liberties/rights, in the name of the "good" guys protecting from the
"bad"
guys.
My point is, XSF may be apolitical regarding the usage of the protocol
(and I
really question that), but the choices around infrastructure, Code
of Conduct, Bylaws, software license, etc are all political-social-ethical
choices at some level. Maybe not primarily, but at some level these choices
have implications in those realms.
First off, while the XSF is currently the major focus point of concerted
protocol development for, and promoting the use of, XMPP, it is not the end
all and be all of all things XMPP. The core protocols are defined over at
the IETF, and you'll find it has a similar approach to try and keep its
workings as neutral as possible. Also, the protocol *and* the community are
intentionally distributedly extensible. That means that stuff can, and
does, happen outside of the XSF.
Second you are correct that nothing is absolute, including views on
political, social, or ethical topics. My job as a director, and chair, is
finding the delicate balance between the personal views of individuals in
the XSF Membership and the XMPP community in general, and the stated goals
of the XSF. Our mission statement (<https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/mission/>)
is quite clear on the position the XSF takes. We also expanded this in our
procedures (e.g. <https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0001.html>) and design
guidelines (<https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0134.html>).
Your concern with regard to OMEMO can be held to all those documents, just
as I use them to guide my work as a director. Also note that we have
already been the target of related pressure, and will continue to push back.
Again I want to stress that the XMPP community includes people not just
rooted in FOSS and its varied(!) political leanings, but equally from
corporations, non-profits, education, government, supranational
organisations, and military organizations.
This all is why trying to elicit a specific response with the casual
mentioning of a major geopolitical event is not helpful to me, and why I
made the general stance on my approach.
--
ralphm
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- standards(a)xmpp.org
To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org