[Council] chat log, 2010-01-25

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Jan 25 14:08:03 CST 2010


*** 2010-01-25
[12:06:42] <Kev> 1) Roll call
[12:06:45] <Kev> All here.
[12:06:49] <Kev> 2) Agenda bashing.
[12:07:33] <Kev> I'll take the silence as a no.
[12:07:39] <Kev> 3) Pubsub
[12:07:39] <psa> agenda's fine :)
[12:07:55] <Kev> I was going to review this before the meeting, and
found Tobias's diff tool's gone again.
[12:07:59] <psa> hmph
[12:08:03] <ralphm> me too
[12:08:04] <Kev> Or, rather
[12:08:07] <psa> ok
[12:08:07] <dwd> I have been sufficiently busy to not go through these yet.
[12:08:09] <psa> so
[12:08:10] <Kev> Ralph told me it had gone, and I trusted him.
[12:08:13] <psa> dwd: understood
[12:08:15] <remko> too busy too
[12:08:20] <Kev> We've got until the end of the week to vote on them.
[12:08:25] <Kev> 4) PEP

[12:08:28] <Kev> similarly.
[12:08:36] <MattJ> Likewise
[12:08:42] <ralphm> I did notice not every change is in the diff
[12:08:51] <ralphm> ehm, log
[12:08:54] <psa> Kev: it seems that we need to make a diff real soon now
-- shall we ping Tobias or produce this via SVN?
[12:09:04] <ralphm> e.g. the addition of 'presence' as a value for
pubsub#expires
[12:09:14] <Kev> psa: Tobias has a working tool, it just needs to be
running on a jorg machine.
[12:09:21] <psa> ah
[12:09:52] <psa> ralphm: I'll double-check that right now
[12:09:56] <dwd> .
[12:10:09] <dwd> (Sorry, conducting heavy testing, unsure of my lag ATM)
[12:10:15] *** Tobias has joined the room as a participant
[12:10:39] <psa> ralphm:
http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0060-1.13.html#impl-tempsub
[12:10:47] <psa> FWIW
[12:10:53] <Kev> Ok, so.
[12:10:57] <ralphm> yes that is not in the changelog, afaics
[12:11:01] <Kev> 5) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/microblogging.html
[12:11:05] <psa> ralphm: ok
[12:11:15] <Kev> (Assuming everyone will vote pubsubby onlist)
[12:11:29] <psa> ralphm: you're right
[12:11:30] <ralphm> +1
[12:11:32] *psa fixes
[12:11:43] <ralphm> I do have comments
[12:11:46] <ralphm> but can do that on list
[12:11:47] <Kev> I had a nitpick with the microblogging, that it looked
like the @addressing should be fully addressed, rather than by nickname.
Other than that it seemed ok.
[12:12:07] <psa> that spec is old and incomplete, I'd think
[12:12:13] <psa> but a good start, probably
[12:12:22] <Kev> I think, as I did last time, that the notion of not
being able to see replies to a post is bizzarre.
[12:12:22] <ralphm> I am also wondering if the scope is too limited
[12:12:28] <Kev> I would like to see that worked into it.
[12:12:39] <MattJ> That always opens a can of worms :)
[12:12:43] <ralphm> I would like to discuss it at the summit
[12:12:49] <dwd> I strongly suspect that Buddycloud will have a huge
input into this, and basically fix in.
[12:12:56] <Kev> MattJ: indubitably.
[12:12:58] <dwd> fix it, rather.
[12:13:03] <psa> yes, having something to discuss at the summit sounds good
[12:13:20] <Kev> I'm not opposed to experimentalling it now, though -
I've not seen much else on the table.
[12:13:20] <MattJ> Agreed to discussing it, I think quite a few people
would be interested in it
[12:13:21] <dwd> But, I think it's a good start, and forms the kernel of
what we'll eventually get.
[12:13:35] <remko> *nod*
[12:13:37] <ralphm> I'm offering to chair that session
[12:13:41] <psa> ralphm: XEP-0060 fixed
[12:13:55] <psa> speaking of sessions, we need to figure out how we'll
run the Summit, but that's another story :)
[12:14:04] <dwd> So I have no objection to this being adopted as a XEP.
[12:14:05] <Kev> So, do we have everyone not vetoing it?
[12:14:30] <MattJ> We do that, I think
[12:14:30] <psa> seems so
[12:14:33] <Kev> It's unclear if Remko or Matt have responded.
[12:14:39] <MattJ> Sorry, I'm in favour
[12:15:08] <remko> ihave
[12:15:15] <remko> ok on experimentalling it
[12:15:20] <Kev> Ok.
[12:15:26] <remko> it does need some discussions
[12:15:26] *psa loves new verbs
[12:15:27] <Kev> 6) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/decloak.html
There's been a discussion on the list now about the alternatives,
which was what we said last week we wanted before voting again, so...
[12:15:53] <psa> yeah, sorry, I have not yet had a chance to update that
one -- I started on it this morning and then things got a bit crazy :)
[12:16:06] <Kev> It seems to me that what's needed is some server logic
for this, that falls between both the presence based and the
subscription based stuff.
[12:16:21] <MattJ> I'm not sure if I've been through /all/ the feedback
on this, but I didn't see a concensus
[12:16:32] <Kev> And that it's probably going to end up in presence, so
I won't block this.
[12:16:39] <ralphm> I sure haven't read all feedback
[12:17:05] *psa shrugs
[12:17:06] <dwd> I think this isn't my preferred approach, but I'm
satisfied that discussion has occured, and that the alternatives have
been considered, so no veto from me.
[12:17:13] <remko> i still have quite some catching up to do, and i plan
on doing it by the end of this week, so i can't really say much now
[12:17:24] <ralphm> I wonder if this actually works in Google Talk
[12:17:27] <psa> I can update the proposal soonish to at least describe
more reasons for this approach
[12:17:30] <dwd> And FWIW, I suspect that it can co-exist with temp-subs.
[12:17:34] *** julm has joined the room as a participant
[12:17:34] <dwd> ralphm, No, it won't.
[12:17:49] <MattJ> ralphm, that's one of the issues
[12:18:07] <ralphm> dwd: does directed presence work there?
[12:18:14] <psa> IMHO we can define a <sesspres/> extension and use it
in either <presence/> *or* <presence type='subscribe'/>
[12:18:21] <MattJ> ralphm, yes, albeit in an interesting way :)
[12:18:41] <MattJ> iirc they re-send direct presence every so often
[12:18:45] <dwd> psa, Right.
[12:18:52] <psa> however, I would strongly prefer not using <presence
type='subscribe'/> if we can avoid it
[12:19:10] <psa> and using that just to route around GTalk's privacy
policies seems like a bad idea
[12:19:21] <remko> couldn't agree more there
[12:19:26] <Kev> psa: I don't think the motivation was ever to use it to
route around GTalk.
[12:19:30] <psa> better to convince them that their policy is misguided
[12:19:34] <Kev> Or wasn't for me, anyway.
[12:19:34] <psa> Kev: I do
[12:19:44] <ralphm> psa: that certainly would be nice
[12:19:54] <Kev> It just seems that what you're asking for, logically,
is a temporary subscription.
[12:20:06] <MattJ> psa, I think I agree with your proposal (and
overloading type="subscribe" probably wouldn't be nice)
[12:20:07] <Kev> But as I say, I'm not vetoing it now that there's been
discussion and I think a path will be found.
[12:20:15] <ralphm> Kev: agreed
[12:20:19] <MattJ> +1
[12:20:30] <remko> no veto from me either
[12:20:51] <Kev> So, there's a long list of stuff being deferred on
standards at . No action's required from us, but just so we're aware of it.
[12:20:53] <psa> conceptually, there's not much difference, if any,
between "sharing presence for the length of this session" and "temporary
subscription" -- I am more focused on the syntactical difference between
<presence/> and <presence type='subsribe'/>
[12:20:57] <Kev> (That was (7))
[12:21:04] <ralphm> I'm +1 for a XEP on this, we don't have to vote on
its current state
[12:21:04] <psa> ok
[12:21:09] <psa> right
[12:21:20] <Kev> psa: Yes, I think you want a bit of both, but I'll post
onlist when I have some cycles to spare.
[12:21:28] <Kev> (8) Date of Next Meeting?
[12:21:33] <psa> but I shall make some fixes to both microblogging and
decloaking / sesspres before publishing
[12:21:38] <ralphm> +1w
[12:21:39] <Kev> psa: ok, thanks.
[12:21:47] <MattJ> Next week is fine by me
[12:21:53] <Kev> Next Monday I can do, I think.
[12:22:05] <psa> WFM
[12:22:09] <Kev> Ok.
[12:22:13] <Kev> 9) AOB?
[12:22:20] <ralphm> sessions at summit?
[12:22:42] <MattJ> and we ought to sort room logging here... I'll add
that to my todo this week
[12:22:42] <psa> for the next meeting perhaps we can also look at
XEP-0001 (sanity check from the Council -- I have a bit of feedback from
dwd to address)
[12:23:08] <dwd> psa, Tragically, I can't remember what it was... :-/
[12:23:18] <psa> dwd: we have list archives :)
[12:23:26] <Kev> ralphm: oh, bother, right. I haven't sent out stuff
about Friday yet.
[12:23:38] <Kev> I'll send out a mail straight after council.
[12:23:46] <Kev> Or straightish, anyway.
[12:23:48] <dwd> psa, Oh, right, that.
[12:23:56] <Kev> It's on my shortterm todo now, instead of sitting in my
mailbox somewhere.
[12:24:18] *** Koski has joined the room as a participant
[12:24:25] <psa> feedback appreciated on upcoming XEP deferrals, too
http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2010-January/023038.html
[12:24:25] <ralphm> hehe
[12:24:44] <psa> no other business from me
[12:24:45] <Kev> I think that, basically, everyone who didn't get a
session on Saturday should seek interest in their talk, and at some
point on the Friday, gather interested people around and talk at them.
[12:24:49] <ralphm> yeah, I made some comments on Jingle XML Streams
[12:25:01] <Kev> If people would rather, I'm happy to put a rough
schedule for those together, or we can leave it freeform.
[12:25:06] <Kev> I'll ask on list which people prefer.
[12:25:06] *psa notes that he'll arrive in Brussels on Saturday because
of some prior commitments
[12:25:13] <ralphm> Kev: I'd just list possible topics
[12:25:17] <Kev> We're happy you're arriving at all, I think
[12:25:26] <psa> aw, shucks
[12:25:35] <ralphm> and we can get together early and make a large
planner sheet
[12:25:38] <Kev> ralphm: do you have a list of the topics that people
wanted, but weren't on the Saturday schedule?
[12:25:41] <Kev> Sure.
[12:25:44] <psa> ralphm: yes
[12:25:45] <dwd> psa, I'll buy you a beer to make up for missing the
beer event.
[12:25:47] <Kev> Then there's Monday.
[12:25:54] <Kev> Which I think we sort out on Monday morning.
[12:25:56] <psa> dwd: heh thanks
[12:26:06] <psa> Kev: or something :)
[12:26:09] <Kev> At least, that's my memory of past Mondays
[12:26:16] <ralphm> Kev: afaik, most people got a slot on Saturday
[12:26:17] <psa> Kev: yes, I might try to be more organized this time
[12:26:22] <psa> ralphm: correct
[12:26:29] <ralphm> there were some suggestions for highly speccy things
[12:26:29] <Kev> Ask in the morning what topics people want to discuss,
order them by preference on the clap-o-meter, and go down the list.
[12:26:44] <psa> +1
[12:26:47] <psa> anything else? :)
[12:26:53] <Kev> I think not.
[12:27:02] <ralphm> Kev: generally, on bar/foocamp like things, you put
up a big sheet with slots
[12:27:07] <ralphm> and then people will fill it
[12:27:19] <Kev> ralphm: this is for Friday? That sounds a good idea.
[12:27:23] <ralphm> works like magic
[12:27:25] <ralphm> yeah
[12:27:28] <Kev> Great.
[12:27:33] <Kev> Everyone else can hack at the back.
[12:27:38] <Kev> Ok, so, I think we're done.
[12:27:44] <psa> yep, I think so
[12:27:44] <Kev> Thanks all
[12:27:48] <ralphm> yaya
[12:27:48] *Kev bangs the gavel.
[12:27:50] <remko> welcome!
[12:27:52] <psa> I'll send this log to the council@ list
[12:28:02] <MattJ> Thanks
[12:28:36] <Kev> Thanks.

END


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6820 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20100125/33ca9a04/attachment.bin>


More information about the Council mailing list