User:Moparisthebest/Council Candidacy 2022

From XMPP WIKI
Revision as of 19:56, 3 November 2022 by Moparisthebest (talk | contribs) (Created page with "== Contact == * Name: Travis Burtrum * Nickname: moparisthebest * github: [https://github.com/moparisthebest moparisthebest] * fediverse: [https://moparisthe.best/moparisthebest moparisthebest@moparisthe.best] * XMPP address: [xmpp:travis@burtrum.org travis@burtrum.org] * Email address: [mailto:travis@burtrum.org travis@burtrum.org] == About Me == I'm just your average programmer interested in open source, federation, e2e encryption, and running my own services to avoid...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Contact

About Me

I'm just your average programmer interested in open source, federation, e2e encryption, and running my own services to avoid reliance on 3rd parties.

I've served one term on the council so far.

I've written 4 XEPs that were accepted, XEP-0368, XEP-0418, XEP-0467, XEP-0468 and one that was not HACX.

If I had to pick a goal/passion when it comes to XMPP, it would have to be connectivity. After all, if a user is faced with a "cannot connect" error, nothing else matters.

Security

I sometimes find security problems in XMPP protocols or implementations:

Council Goals

Accept Early Accept Often: ProtoXEPs should be accepted as experimental if they solve a problem and are clearly written (ie, someone can read this and implement it). It doesn't matter if they solve a problem another XEP has already attempted to solve but in a different way. It's not council's job to decide which way is better, that decision should be left up to "running code" (ie implementations).

What follows from that is XEPs that have stood the test of time and are widely implemented need moved to Stable aggressively, and XEPs that have been abandoned need Deferred/Deprecated as appropriate.