-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/23/09 2:21 PM, Fabio Forno wrote: > 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
I'm curious what you mean by "already now it is very difficult to be updated about any aspect of XEPs". Part of the problem is that we've mostly had one spec author, and that introduces bottlenecks. But that situation has changed a bit over the last 12 months and I think it will get better over time because more people are helping with the writing and maintenance of XEPs. Also, we essentially have one "working group", which is this list. I have started other lists as informal special interest groups (for PubSub, Jingle, MUC, etc.). Some of those are more active than others, but overall I think that it has been productive to offload some of the discussions from this list to special-purpose lists. I agree that we have some scalability challenges, but overall I don't think they are too serious. Yet. :) Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkq6hr4ACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzfFwCg2K6vHU78eRGtZ+TfjUnfcOND Fp8AoKMB8AcDXX3ztQNZvs4Hp7vmoiFR =IRmw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
