[Members] Voting criteria

Hal Rottenberg halr9000 at gmail.com
Thu May 12 15:43:08 CDT 2005


> Not to be a downer at all here, but... Julian Missig and I wrote up a
> proposal for a certification system -- the process, the levels, etc. --
> back about a year ago.  And we were shredded on JDEV for it by a few
> people, because they felt it was 'unfair' to hold clients to some kind
> of standard without respect for the differing goals of different
> clients.

> Is there any reason to think a certification process will be any more
> popular this time around?  I'm all for one, but curious about that.

[don flame-retardant vest]

Didn't I say life isn't fair earlier in this thread?  :)  More
popular?  Tough question.  But we /do/ have these shiny and hardly
used RFCs and JEPs for Basic and Intermediate standards.  Past time to
do something with them or they are meaningless.  The council did
approve them, all of s-jig were or could be a part of the process.  I
don't see the big deal there.

As far as clients having different goals...The clients that aren't
XMPP compliant won't be certified.  That's meant to be a bare minimum
on purpose.  Those who do not wish to comply...well what good is an
email client today with "57% SMTP compliance!"?  And I would suggest
that after a certain date (whatever time we choose), Jabber.org should
not link to non-XMPP compliant clients in the same
"jabber.org/clients" list.  This could be obvious or subtle, again as
we chooes.  I'm not trying to be draconian here, just that if we want
to show our good side, its in our best interest to filter the list
somewhat.

An example of a subtle way to do this that hopefully wouldn't offend
too many devs would be to give everyone a whole year.  After that year
is up, insert a field into the list of clients (and servers?) called
"development status" (I'm modeling this after freshmeat.net's same). 
The projects which are not XMPP compliant would either be filtered out
by default, and allow users to change a listbox and click "submit" to
see the whole list or just those "non-compliant"; or they could be
visually different in the list, like have a lighter shade of text or
whatever.

And those who do not wish to attain a higher level of certification
(such as one that would include the Basic or Intermediate JEPs, or
other JEPs we so choose), simply won't apply for that level of
certification.  The reason wouldn't matter.  They just won't get the
"gold star".  Having file transfer or XHTML-IM doesn't apply to your
project?  MUC is not on your roadmap?  No big deal.

Those who want to comply but don't have the resources can make a plea
on JDEV etc for volunteers.  This is no different than projects who
lack resources now.

So in summary:
- If you refuse to become XMPP compliant, don't expect much sympathy
- If that is all you want to do, great!
- If you want to go even further, you get recognized for that.  

And to pick up the "Official JSF" thread here:
- If you want to be "the best", we have the highest accolade for you.

/me ducks.  

That came out much harsher than I intended.  But I'm leaving it
unedited because I think it's a good email.  Just realize I'm not a
total #%$ in real life.

-- 
Psi webmaster (http://psi-im.org)
im:hal at jabber.rocks.cc
http://halr9000.com


More information about the Members mailing list