[Standards] Council Minutes 2020-08-12

Tedd Sterr teddsterr at outlook.com
Tue Aug 18 17:10:14 UTC 2020


https://logs.xmpp.org/council/2020-08-12?p=h#2020-08-12-c6090d22bb8b35fd

1) Roll Call
Present: Jonas, Zash, Georg, Daniel, Dave

2) Agenda Bashing
Jonas apologises for the dreadful return of PR #971.

3) Editor's Update
* XEP-0045 v1.33.0 which removes 307 status code from service-caused kicks (as opposed to moderation-caused kicks)

4) Discuss whether PR#971 was rejected on false premises
Jonas explains that Flow correctly brought up that cancel-type forms are 'special,' so it's worth discussing whether that changes people's votes (particularly the vetoes.)
Jonas thinks some of his original arguments are now invalid, as XEP-0004 states that 'a data form of type "cancel" SHOULD NOT contain any <field/> elements', and since others based their own reasoning on his, maybe a re-vote is necessary.
Upon further reflection, Jonas provides an updated PR [1] with the intention of voting on both it and PR #971 next week.
Dave makes a special guest appearance. Jonas expects that Dave will have strong opinions regarding Process in the case of re-voting on an already vetoed PR, and would like to hear them. Dave suggests that PRs are merely a convenient method to give things to Council, and doesn't think there is anything to prevent using the same one twice, although he would be concerned about re-voting on an already vetoed PR unless new things have come to light - Georg and Jonas expect this case constitutes such 'new things.' Dave thinks this is a good argument for avoiding "me too" votes.
Dave recalls being on-list with his vote due to confusion about what the wording used to say compared to now, which suggests the wording needs improvement, but understands that everyone is generally happy with the intent of Flow's change.
Jonas takes all of this to mean that Council should vote again on PR #971 and/or #975 next week - everyone should read carefully in preparation.

5) Date of Next
2020-08-19 1500 UTC

6) AOB
Georg sent a mail regarding MUC-PMs vs Direct Messages [2], but there is only one response so far - would love see more. Jonas will take a look and see if he can reply soonish (feel free to poke if none by the end of the week.)

7) Close
Jonas thanks everyone for making an appearance despite the melting heat enveloping Western Europe.


[1] https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/975
[2] https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2020-August/037666.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20200818/896203fa/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list