[Standards] Council Minutes 2019-07-10

Tedd Sterr teddsterr at outlook.com
Wed Jul 17 13:57:37 UTC 2019


http://logs.xmpp.org/council/2019-07-10?p=h#2019-07-10-853eb083fe2465d9

An expectant silence falls as everyone waits for the nod from the venerable Chair.
Georg gets impatient and appropriates the revered chair, assuming his alter-ego, Fake-Dave.

1) Roll Call
Present: Georg, Link, Jonas, Dave
Apologies: Kev

2) Agenda Bashing
Fake-Dave asks whether there is anything further to add to the agenda - it appears not.

3a) PR #797 - XEP-0128: Remove 'unlikely' statement - https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/797
Jonas: +1
Georg: +1 (looks straight-forward; pretty sure it's not a breaking change)
Link: +1
Dave: [pending]
Kev: [pending]

3b) PR #796 - XEP-0368: clarify what happens when a `.` target is published - https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/796
Jonas: +1
Link: +1 (definitely!)
Georg: +1 (this is just a clarification of RFC 2782)
Dave: [pending]
Kev: [pending]

4) Outstanding Votes
Fake-Dave notes the two voting items which expire today, with missing input from Kev and Link.
Link has yet to review the document for his remaining vote.

Real-Dave makes an appearance, grumbling about useless DSL service.

5) Next Meeting
2019-07-17 1500 UTC

6) AOB
Jonas still doesn't know what to do about Jingle things - without the insight that comes from implementing it, it's difficult to judge whether a change to Jingle (and other large, complex sub-protocols) is sensible; so it's difficult to feel confident voting on such things. Others have mentioned that "Jingle veterans" would be qualified to give reviews, and this seems like a sane way forward, though it would be better if Council actually had the technical understanding for everything, but that's unrealistic with so many XEPs.
Georg thinks that Council should formally request independent reviews from a small number of people not already involved in the PR.
Dave's view is that while Council has the final say, how that decision is reached is up to Council members, and that may involve deferring to external expertise or something else; but is in favour of getting independent reviews. Georg would like to prevent the situation where all Council members privately ask for feedback from the same source and each base their (supposedly independent) decisions on that.
Jonas would like to ask on the mailing list for specific +1/-1 feedback on the PRs from Jingle veterans - Georg is fine with this, but wonders how to define who qualifies as a veteran - Jonas suggests author/implementer during CFE. Dave suggests discussing who to ask for reviews when things come up for voting; Georg recommends deferring on such a vote, and defining a list of people to consult - Dave has usually found that one decent review is enough to spark a discussion which illuminates the issues.

Georg wonders if this should be done for PR #793 - Jonas thinks so. Georg asks Peter if he feels confident in estimating the implications of PR #793 and able to review it in two weeks time - Peter commits to it. Georg doesn't see a clear indication from Fippo's email - should ask for clarification. Georg also asks Link to review the PR and make a public statement on the mailing list thread - Link agrees to do so.
Peter adds Lance as another Jingle veteran who could possibly review PRs.

7) Close
Fake-Dave thanks everyone; everyone thanks Fake-Dave. Real-Dave thanks Fake-Dave for stepping up.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20190717/75f1de38/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list