[Standards] A Meta-Discussion about the Standards Process

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Fri Jan 17 11:00:52 UTC 2020


On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 10:26, Daniel Gultsch <daniel at gultsch.de> wrote:

> have potential to improve the current situation. The problem with the
> status quo of how Council makes its decisions is that it is a
> combination of tribal law and seemingly arbitrary judgment calls. If
> we want to continue with the current status quo we need to codify the
> rules that Council has been following in XEP-0001. To outsiders our
> decisions must not seem arbitrary. If my XEP got rejected I need to
> know why and I need to know that Council followed rules or guidelines
> instead of just not liking me personally. For example, I remember the
> rejection of MUC Light as being highly  controversial and not very
> well received by the authors.[1]
>

(I'll sort of reply to this backwards)

You remember drama because there was - I vetoed that, so I remember it
well. I don't often veto things, at least from my perspective, but I might
be deluding myself.

Moreover, I use the protocol now - we use it for team chats in Pando,
because, as claimed, it works much better than XEP-0045 for mobile, though
in fairness we're not using very much of MUC Light either - it just happens
to be easier to drive form the MongooseIM API. It's also an evolutionary
dead-end, and I haven't changed my mind that it's unsuited to Standards
Track, despite the fact I'm using it. (Widespread support would be quite
convenient to me and my employer, in fact).

I know how frustrating it is to get a veto, as well - I suspect I might
have written more vetoed ProtoXEPs than anyone else, but I can only imagine
it's far worse to have your first attempt as a newcomer rejected seemingly
out of hand.

While I think I use the veto rarely (and I imagine statistics may surprise
me), and I think I'm consistent, I'm fully aware that my consistency is not
consistent with that of others - different Council people apply different,
and entirely personal, rules.

I'm all in favour of codifying the rules, but I think it'd be useful to
understand from current and previous members of Council what they used as
their personal yardsticks, and try to understand what the community at
large thinks Council ought to be thinking about.

Also, I have wildly different ideas about what's acceptable on the
Standards Track compared to off it, and we really don't have much options
but on it now.

Dave.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20200117/0fadad7b/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list