[Foundation] my thoughts

[Peter Saint-Andre]

I've been thinking quite a bit about the role and purpose of 
the JSF of late, and I've come to the following conclusions:

1. JEPs provide documentation of protocols that have been or 
are being implemented.

2. The distinction between standards-track and informational 
JEPs is bogus. Some protocols are more popular than others, 
and they become "standards" in an organic fashion (de facto, 
not de jure).

3. The distinction between protocol developers and implementers 
(standards-jig vs. jdev) is the slippery slope to irrelevance.

4. The jabber.org website is more than JEPs -- it contains other
documentation, software links, news, etc. This is right.

5. The Jabber community is more than JEPs, and it is the Jabber
community that matters, not the JSF's so-called standards process 
(except as JEPs provide documentation to developers).

6. The JSF is at best an unnecessary distraction, and at best 
positively harmful.  

Therefore I suggest:

1. We abolish the JSF and its so-called standards process.

2. We keep JEPs as informational documentation ("jepforge", 
anyone?). We keep the JEP editor in a role that is purely 
editorial, but abolish the Council. There are no de jure 
standards, only de facto standards.

3. We terminate the standards-jig mailing list and discuss 
all protocols on the jdev at jabber.org mailing list.

4. We retain www.jabber.org as an informational website and 
community hub, as it is now.

No, this is not an April Fool's email. I am completely serious 
about everything I've written above.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation
http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php