Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft of message about chat trials

[Glen <[e-mail]>]

On 12/9/2020 11:30, Robert Sparks wrote:
> Do you think this is sufficient or do we need to take a different approach?

Might I suggest one potential add:

Truncating for focus.... maybe between these two sections add something 
like:

--snip--

> We are not aware of anyone trying to use the zulip or matrix servers for 
> ietf work outside the main meeting.
> 
> If you've used the services, please take a few minutes to provide 
> feedback at [e-mail].

If you are interested in using these services more directly for your 
working group's day-to-day communication, and are willing to test one or 
both of these services on a primary basis for a while, please let us 
know so we can help accommodate.   We especially encourage leadership 
teams, and groups with an interest in remote participation/communication 
to get involved here.

If you are one of those who has had, or has reported, issues using 
Jabber, please take some time now to work with these new services and 
help the IETF help the community.

The more usage and exposure these services get, the better informed the 
IETF's future planning will be.

> Is providing local jabber accounts and a web interface to jabber 
> sufficient?
> Are there features that matrix or zulip provide that are truly helpful 
> for progressing IETF work? If so, please describe how they are helping.

--snip--

My thoughts just for this list (and its public archive):

I feel like we don't want to just be observers here.  We've all heard 
*repeated* complaints about Jabber.   I like Jabber, but, really, we've 
gotten complaints, and here we're trying to solve issues, and we've 
had...  37 people participate.

I feel like we should encourage, even *prod*, the community to work with 
these new services (including the new Jabber client services) and really 
get involved in this process.

And there are some obvious candidates for these things:

* We should encourage the IESG, IAB, IRTF leadership teams to get 
involved.  Not to mention the Tools Architecture Team, and even the 
larger Tools-Discuss team.

* We should encourage the XMPP, SHMOO, MANYCOUCHES, and any other such 
groups to get involved.

* We should encourage anyone currently using IETF Slack or other 
alternative channels.

* We should encourage the team members for each of the three protocols 
(i.e. the people who set up Prosody/EJabberd, Matrix, and Zulip) to step 
up and help us encourage participation.

* Because Matrix has active attention from its developers, I have been 
hanging out on Zulip, I'd like to make an Implementation stream there 
and see if I can get the six of us involved.  :-)

* We should make clear that if people want positive change, they need to 
get involved.

Otherwise, a less-informed decision will be made, and the community will 
be less-happy.

You obviously don't need to use my words, or even any of this, this is 
just feedback.  The IETF needs some visible guidance and reminders to 
get involved here, and I think that falls to us.

Glen