<scribe> Meeting: Social CG Telecon

<scribe> scribenick: cwebber2

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/12-7-socialcg-telecon/339

introductions

cwebber2: I'm activitypub co-editor and socialcg co-chair

nightpool: I'm a mstodon developer and socialcg co-chair

sl007: I work on Redactor, an ActivityPub CMS

Goals and roadmap for the SocialCG in 2020

nightpool: I wanted to get an interest check for what work the socialcg can do in 2020

sl007: I agree with cwebber about ocappub / bearer tokens / etc. I'd like to improve the onboarding experience, especially with main activitypub.rocks page
... I hoped hellekin would be here, but I could read the post about activitypub at offdem

nightpool: I definitely think that we need some sort of input from the wider fediverse here, would be interested in how we can do that... a survey, or?

sl007: I mentioned the post by rigel where Chris already answered some things on socialhub, some things were repeated on the forum, for example scmittlauch (sp?) to link things on the activitypub.rocks page, and top-bar links on there
... part of the question is, who can edit the main page?
... I can see also a demonstration, and he was already working on that

nightpool: yes, I guess I'm not exactly sure how to answer that in the context of this discussion, but I definitely think improving activitypub.rocks is important; there's a couple of different avenues of open-ended "what should be on there" and individual getting-things-on-there. While I think it's good to keep talking about this about what to add to the page, it's a bit early to make concrete specific changes
... yeah... the Join Mastodon has gone through a few different changes in terms of how we source them, we initially just sourced them from the crawler, recently there's a new standard they have to adhere to
... there's an "instance covenant" that lays out a baseline about what needs to be included on the page. so instances that agree to that can be added. a question to me is "who is the main use case for the for users page"?
... are we trying to promote the visibility of implementations? A more aspirational picture of what's possible? What's the high level goal, where do we see that fitting into the current page which is very implementor focused
... I definitely think... it's good to change that, but I want to think about what that means

cwebber: should we move this discussion to the socialhub forum?

nightpool: I think that makes sense

cwebber: topic 1: Should activitypub.rocks link to a guide that isn't the speicfication, and if so, what?
... topic 2: Should activitypub.rocks give recommendations to users on software / instances to start using?
... I think maybe it makes more sense to not recommend instances but just recommend software, the software cand recommend their own implementations

sl007: we could link to https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/c/software

nightpool: yes but let's move this discussion to the forum
... I think if we think these visual changes are easier to make, let's set a goal. I can take this on as an action item, or you can cwebber2?
... do you think we can get them made before the next emeting?

cwebber2: I can try to get them done by today, if I can't, it won't happen by the next meeting

nightpool: ok, I can try to see how to get it running

cwebber2: I can give some instructions off-meeting

nightpool: anything else if we're popping the stack upwards
... any other thoughts on 2020?

cwebber: how to keep engagement in these meetings?

nightpool: I think that's important... let me collect my thoughts

sl007: I just wanted to mention the FOSSDEM / OFFDEM thing again, it's just this one post in the socialhub forum in it so far, but nobody replied to hellekin. After organizing apconf I can't organize it on my own. If we want to be with activitypub at either of them, there needs to be some other people
... there is a dedicated room where we can have a dedicated conference at OFFDEM, there's an opportunity not seen at FOSDEM not normally seen in the tech meeting of FOSDEM

nightpool: great, do you think about how that ties in with (bi)weekly meetings?

sl007: I'm not sure, maybe we should wait until hellekin is in the meeting

nightpool: one other thing to mention quickly, then we can set this down for now, the post you made on socialhub on offdem is only visible to people in a certain category... it's only visible to people who have made interest in FOSDEM, maybe we can make it more public?

sl007: yes I'll point that out to hellekin

nightpool: yeah I think this meeting tends to get a lot of interest when people have things they want to discuss. Capturing that and making progress on them will make a difference. kaniini mentioned that these meetings don't tie in as well into the issue tracker. we can mention these things on the issue tracker / telecon
... that's a good point, there's two categories of issues, one is to get clarification on the spec. sometimes those move to normative / non-normative spec changes. Making a list of those and going through them on the meetings can be useful especially when they're low hanging fruit, and may give us forward momentum. The second is the broader issues we keep coming back to: in-page social activity, restricting replying, etc.

It's not as clear to me whether it's as useful to do so in the meetings

nightpool: yeah, if we do triage maybe we can figure that out better, at least if we do that we can get to the state of knowing what they are

https://emacsconf.org/2019/

https://emacsconf.org/2019/videos

sl007: cwebber you mentioned the barcelona thing, is there any news on that one?

cwebber: I don't know of anything about the barcelona event

sl007: if this is not happening I would go for the virtual conference

nightpool: I think a virtual conference would be great. Making a good decision on that now so we could give people on that lead time would be great, maybe around this summer?

cwebber2: the person who ran the emacs conference, which I thought went great, offered to help guide us in running one

https://emacsconf.org/2019/videos

nightpool: yes we should put it on the forum but be clear that it's tentative, not say we're completely committed yet, we're still exploring it but gathering feedback

<sl007> +1

<Shlee> Do you have an estimation of costs for a emacscon style econference?

cwebber: just wanted to say congrats on doing a great job chairing your first socialcg meeting :)

<sl007> to nightpool /me applause applause applause

nightpool: I think the final topic can be deferred for this meeting (content and plain text stuff) doesn't have the interested parties so we'll move that discussion back to the forums and bring it back here when there's more progress to talk about

cambridgeport90[m]: cool thanks :)

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 0.76)

Succeeded: s/do that next time/move that discussion back to the forums and bring it back here when there's more progress to talk about/

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy
        <amy> Present+

Found ScribeNick: cwebber2
Inferring Scribes: cwebber2

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)