[Standards] XMPP Council Minutes 2018-06-06
teddsterr at outlook.com
Sat Jun 9 00:52:42 UTC 2018
1) Roll Call - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll_Call_(Hank_Mobley_album)
Present: Dave, Kev, Daniel, Sam
2) Isn't it nice that Tedd Sterr does the minutes?
Dave pokes the dead horse again to make sure it really is dead ("I'm pretty sure it just twitched" he thinks to himself).
3) Proposed XMPP Extension: OMEMO Media sharing - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/omemo-media-sharing.html
Dave asks for opinions. Daniel is unsurprisingly supportive, but understands it might be controversial for others. Sam isn't a fan of the way Conversations shares encrypted files, but isn't against standardising it; and wonders whether it might be better to use a more common encrypted-archive format, e.g. Zip, so files could still be opened by an external program if the client lacks support.
Jonas suggests that Zip encryption is horribly broken; Sam admits it might be, though it does support an AES mechanism that's allegedly not broken, but used Zip more as a widely supported format and there may be better options.
Daniel notes that it's more 'informational' than standardising. Dave has concerns over inventing a new URI scheme, and including a thumbnail in the same field; and thinks Informational XEPs should describe Best Practices, which this doesn't appear to be. Kev feels making it Informational is wrong, and wouldn't be fond of Historical (in its latest connotation), but could see the argument for it.
The server freezes for a few minutes, causing mass hysteria and panic.
Dave regains his composure and requests votes.
Dave: -1 (if we had this now we'd be trying to deprecate it)
4) Proposed XMPP Extension: Ephemeral Messages - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/ephemeral-messages.html
Kev isn't entirely sure he even understands this one.
Daniel has implemented burner messages before and doesn't think this is the way to do it.
Dave (thinks he) mostly understands it, but doesn't see how one can do ephemeral messages reliably in an open environment. Kev thinks it's meant to be advisory, and one can do advisory ephemeral messages in an open environment.
Sam is unimpressed, and notes that everyone seems to be in agreement.
Dave has no idea how the advisory nature would be communicated to the user; Kev adds, as another example, dealing with the UX of messages disappearing at different times from the local archive.
Daniel thinks there is too much weird stuff for something that is supposedly advisory; suggests simply adding <burn-after seconds="5"/> to messages, which is how he usually implements this feature.
Daniel adds that not everyone is running XMPP in an open environment; Dave concedes.
Kev blames Lua for the intermittent server freezes.
Dave: -1 (NTP-over-XMPP is enough [of a reason])
Georg: [on-list] (don't like it, but have no constructive ideas how to make ephemeral messages work better)
Kev doesn't believe it is NTP over XMPP, and thinks it tries to synchronise message age for expiration.
Daniel has previously offered to document his usual approach to this, but nobody was interested, however, the offer still stands if people will find it useful; Kev suggests it might be worthwhile, if only to avoid others doing the same thing in stranger ways.
4a) XEP-0045: Add a feature for the voice request flow #653 - https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/653
Dave apologises that while this wasn't on the agenda, he thought he'd raise it and people could vote on-list if necessary.
Kev thinks the PR should mention that the normative SHOULD wasn't normative in the past; but as voice requests are barely ever implemented, there's unlikely to be much fallout from adding this as-is, not that it's hard to add "this feature advertisement wasn't present in earlier versions of the specification, so servers might implement voice requests and not advertise it".
Sam isn't a fan of growing 0045 by adding more things for such a rarely used feature, but wouldn't block it.
Kev's not sure what it achieves, other than being certain that a voice request is supported (as there's no way to know that it's not.)
Dave: +1 (looks straightforward; would be even happier if Kev's caveat were added)
Sam: [on-list] (keep going back and forth between "it doesn't matter" and "we need to stop adding cruft")
Kev: +0 (don't see how it's actually helping anything, but won't block it)
Jonas doesn't see a feature var as cruft and thinks the existing feature spec is pretty useless without it.
Georg returns from helping the Bundespolizei with their missing pizza investigation, and casts his pending votes (noted in-line, above.)
5) Outstanding Votes - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AZ-Sna6OiRG--b-mJMKv3XXfrn3Nehm0kAtlyJvImL0/edit
Dave hasn't updated the Spreadsheet of Doom for some time, and so doesn't know what's outstanding.
6) AOB - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abom_language
A tree falls in a remote forest, hundreds of kilometres from civilization; nobody hears.
7) Next Meeting
2018-06-13 1500 UTC is accepted; Georg won't be able to make it.
Dave toddles off to update the legendary spreadsheet.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards