[Council] meeting minutes, 2007-07-11

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Sorry, was offline for a few hours, hopefully what you post below is not
in conflict the XEPs I just published (server dialback from rfc3920bis
and the data forms media element from XEP-0158)...

Ralph Meijer wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 12:16 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> Results of the XMPP Council meeting held 2007-07-11...
>>
>> Agenda:
>>
>> http://www.jabber.org/council/meetings/agendas/2007-07-11.html
>>
>> Log:
>>
>> http://www.jabber.org/muc-logs/council@conference.jabber.org/2007-07-11.html
>>
>> 0. Roll Call
>>
>> Chris Mullins, Ian Paterson, Peter Saint-Andre, and Kevin Smith in
>> attendance. Ralph Meijer absent. Quorum achieved.
> 
> This time my excuse was Birgit, our first child, born 28 June, that
> needed feeding. I'm slowly getting back to catching up on stuff (again).
> That also reminds me that I should probably blog about her.

Please do, some of us read your Jaiku stream only via IM and sometimes
miss things that way. We need a Mimir-like interface to catch up. ;-)

>> 1. Next meeting July 25. Kevin will not be available then.
>>
>> 2. XEP-0211: XMPP Basic Client 2008
>>
>> Advance version 0.5 to Draft?
>>
>> Consensus on changing XEP-0115 to recommended given recent changes to
>> that spec. Peter to publish version 0.6. Ralph to vote on list.
> 
> Yeah, it is too bad that we need to change this spec so late in the
> game, but I can live with it being only recommended. +1. Did Chris
> agree?

He didn't object. :)

>> 3. XEP-0212: XMPP Basic Server 2008
>>
>> Advance version 0.5 to Draft?
> 
> +1
> 
>> 4. XEP-0213: XMPP Intermediate IM Client 2008
>>
>> Advance version 0.4 to Draft?
>>
>> Consensus on adding XEP-0155 (Stanza Session Negotiation) as
>> recommended. Peter to publish version 0.5. Ralph to vote on list.
> 
> I like that addition. +1
> 
>> 5. XEP-0216: XMPP Intermediate IM Server 2008
>>
>> Advance version 0.2 to Draft?
> 
> +1

... So I'll advance those.

> 
>> 6. XEP-0080: User Geolocation
>>
>> Approve version 1.4pre3?
>>
>> Chris and Ralph to vote on list.
> 
> +1 on the changes now, as opposed to the previous pre version. But I
> thought I already +1'd mutatis mutandis.

Ooh, one of my favorite Latin phrases. You did, but I like to be sure.

>> 7. XEP-0060: Publish-Subscribe
>>
>> Approve version 1.10pre1?
>>
>> Peter to update with preconditions protocol before Council approves changes.
> 
> Except don't call it preconditions, but use a more generic term like
> <publish-options/>, and make the description of the field that will hold
> the desired access model state that it works as a precondition, along
> with how it works if the precondition is not met.
> 
> The reason for my suggestion here is that we (or people outside the XSF
> building on top of this spec) may want to do other nifty stuff down the
> road and this makes a nice container for it. Besides other preconditions
> (last modified?), one could have things like item-level access control
> (ick!).

Yes, we discussed that via IM. I'll work it up that way.

>> 8. XEP-0163: PEP
>>
>> Approve version 1.1pre4?
>>
>> Depends on changes to XEP-0060.
> 
> I suppose nothing really changes here now anymore except for some
> examples?

Right.

> I don't think the publish-options thing should be in examples in this
> specification. 

Agreed.

> For the stated use cases of PEP, the default access model
> would be roster and no need to confuse implementers at this point. That
> can be left to the 'personal publishing' thing we are doing for
> XEP-0189.
> 
> This version of PEP should basically be 1.0 with some stuff moved to
> XEP-0060 and more clarifications.

Correct.

> If so, I +1 mutatis mutandis.
> 
>> Also, Ian and Peter to work on "persistent data publishing" profile of
>> pubsub (name to be determined).
> 
> Sure. If you are discussing it sometime online, drag me in the room.

Will do.

>> 9. XEP-0108: User Activity
>>
>> Approve version 1.2pre1?
>>
>> No objections to publishing updated version.
> 
> +1
> 
>> [..]
>> 13. Proto-XEP: Server Dialback
>>
>> Accept as a XEP?
>>
>> Peter explained reasons for moving this text from rfc3921bis to a XEP.
>> No objections.
> 
> +1 on the move. Need to review the text still, though.

Please do (when you have time).

>> 14. Other Business
>>
>> Discussion of methods for encouraging implementation of ESessions, e.g.,
>> two in-person meetings for developers to complete interop testing and
>> protocol clarification (one in N. America, one in Europe).
> 
> +1. I also like the suggestion for the locations ;-)

Other suggestions welcome. :)

/psa

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7354 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20070711/8ba8b845/smime-0001.bin