[Standards] Council Minutes 2019-09-04

Tedd Sterr teddsterr at outlook.com
Wed Sep 11 13:40:54 UTC 2019


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

2) Agenda Bashing
Dave notes the CS-2020 proto-XEP; Jonas adds PR #812.

3a) Proposed XMPP Extension: XMPP Compliance Suites 2020 - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/cs-2020.html
Georg: +1 (obviously)
Kev: [on-list]
Jonas: +1 (we can discuss details in Experimental)
Dave: [on-list] (need time to look at this)
Link: [pending]

3b) PR #812 - XEP-0084: Bump bytes datatype from unsignedShort to unsignedInteger - https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/812
Georg: [on-list]
Dave: +1 (just rectifies an error in the XML schema)
Kev: [on-list] (default to +1, unless I think of a reason later)
Jonas: +1
Link: [pending]

4) Outstanding Votes
Dave thinks Georg and Link have some votes outstanding; Georg mailed votes last night.
Jonas changes his vote on XEP-0353 to -1 (the LC provided valuable feedback to be considered before Draft.)

5) Next Meeting
2019-09-11 1500 UTC

6a) AOB i
Georg thinks the Introduction in XEP-0412 (XMPP Compliance Suites 2019) is awful for informing developers that this is the XEP for guidance on what to implement first - would like to change this text to make compliance a secondary concern. Jonas and Dave are supportive.

6b) AOB ii
Georg has added a "Future Development" section [1] because something like that is needed, but the content is very rough - requests suggestions for XEPs to be included. Jonas delves into the future and suggests XEP-0500 (title to be announced).
Dave says the text should have broad community agreement; Kev says in an Ideal World the community would agree with Council - Council has purview over, and should agree to a statement of, technical direction.
Dave suspects this will cause a lot of discussion, but potentially few conclusions; Jonas thinks a Wiki page would be more appropriate - Georg accepts that is possible, but can always axe the section if there are issues. Kev thinks it would be fine with a little tweaking; if it simply says "These are the areas which Council believe …", then it's non-contentious as long as Council agree among themselves; or if it suggests these are areas under development, rather than forecasting the future.
Kev very very very very very very very much thinks we should have that section, if only to stop the Compliance Suites from being used as a form of wishful thinking. Jonas agrees with the sentiment, but doesn't think the Compliance Suites are the right place for that, though it would make their purpose immediately clear (by having a dedicated Future section.)
Georg thinks there is value in having a section containing XEPs that implementers should watch closely, and possibly implement (on the understanding they will likely change). Dave says there is both aspirational and development stuff that could be there - Georg thinks it need subsections; Kev suggests adding a summary of why it's there.

6c) AOB iii
Georg doesn't expect the remaining items to fit into the remaining three minutes - they each deserve a Council Meeting of their own.

Georg requests comments on-list in reply to "Persisting Message Errors (XEP-0280, XEP-0313, XEP-0160)" [2].

6d) AOB iv
Kev thinks archives need to be drastically rethought - Georg suggests rethinking message delivery, and then fixing archives on the way (not that this wasn't supposedly started two years ago.)

Dave is a little concerned that there is a risk for every XEP in this space to be rejected unless someone comes up with a proposal - Ralph and Kev have been working on something they hope will lead to a proposal; Georg mentions that there was a very productive discussion a few days ago [3], which he tried to summarise [4]. Kev says Ralph is writing a blog post [5] about it.
Jonas tried to contact the authors of Reactions (concerning follow-up), but didn't get a reply - Dave notes that Marvin did join the XSF, which is positive.

Kev is ahead of his schedule and might be able to write something tomorrow - asks whether he should update XEP-0367 (Message Attaching), or write a new, if mostly duplicate, one for attaching, or roll it into XEP-0372 (References) - Jonas thinks a breaking change will be needed in any case, so go with a separate document for now. Kev would like guidance from Council, to avoid a fight about having done the wrong thing.
Kev assumes there is no desire to have all of this described in a single document - Georg agrees; Jonas says References needs fixing first; Dave honestly doesn't care. Georg says three use cases were identified in the discussion, and each should have its own document; Kev says there are three halves: references, attaching, and threads (but that can be left for now.)

Dave notes the meeting is now 10 minutes over, and would like to call it a day.

Kev would like a concrete agreement on the approach - updating References for one half, and a new proto-XEP for the other (possibly later overwriting Message Attachment, if agreed.) Georg considers forking to a new document might be a better way forward. Jonas doesn't have a strong opinion, but strongly disagrees with References being the right place for this. Kev begs for confirmation of his approach. Jonas suggests preparing an update to Message Attaching, and if a separate XEP is needed then that's a trivial thing - Kev would rather not deal with the bureaucracy of removing an author, but will if that's what Council decides. Kev again pleads for some kind of agreement.
Kev states his preference is to fork for now, but will do either - Jonas says do whatever (except merge into References), just get a proposal out; Dave says a new XEP is the least contentious. Kev says that Georg already said fork and is taking this as agreement - thank you, goodnight. Kev will see what he can get done tomorrow.

7) Close
Link puts in a fleeting appearance.
Kev thanks all.
Jonas thanks Dave for chairing, Kev for stabbing the attaching thing, and everyone for everything.
Georg thanks Jonas for thanking.

[1] https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/cs-2020.html#future
[2] https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2019-August/036332.html
[3] http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/2019-08-29?p=h#2019-08-29-5f52a1ed97da8922
[4] https://gist.github.com/ge0rg/a255cb521e45bbcb89573aa3218f0cd5
[5] https://ralphm.net/blog/2019/09/09/fastening

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20190911/67d7c426/attachment.html>

More information about the Standards mailing list