On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think the story is not really different at the XSF. Yes, it would be > nice to have people on the Council who know about a particular problem > domain. But it's even more important to have people on the Council who > are good at finding and then listening to the relevant experts. When the > current Council was voting on advancement of the Jingle specs, none of > the Council members were experts on session negotiation, multimedia, > voice and video, etc. But they closely monitored the relevant list > discussions, asked experts for their feedback, etc. So I think that the > XSF is the right place for any kind of work on XMPP extensions (where > else would we send people?), if we know how to work intelligently and > gain feedback from those who know more about a given problem domain than > we do.
Yes, the picture is clear. In fact I mainly had two worries: - not closing the discussion about these topics, because we need the feedback from people using XMPP - be sure about scalability within the XSF; already now it is very difficult to be updated about any aspect of XEPs (and that is a good thing because it means the thing is becoming huge) and if the application domain grows even more perhaps we will need to reorganize something since the council risks to become a bottleneck bye -- Fabio Forno, Bluendo srl http://www.bluendo.com jabber id: [email protected]
