2021-03-01 2021-03-02 [11:05:09.0923] 👋 2021-03-03 2021-03-04 2021-03-05 2021-03-06 [08:49:12.0780] mpcsh: did we ever start the IRC bridge yet? I could set up the IRC bridges before the meeting if you'd like? [10:17:19.0865] Didn’t we come to the conclusion not to set one up? Unless I missed something [10:22:31.0751] > <@jasew:matrix.org> Didn’t we come to the conclusion not to set one up? Unless I missed something hm, I must've just forgotten about it. Was it in the meeting? I can quickly scan for it in the notes 2021-03-07 [13:38:58.0192] PSA: Do not use #freenode_#tc39:matrix.org . It is not logged, and does not reliably propagate messages to anywhere in particular 2021-03-08 [00:05:10.0461] > <@dehrenberg:igalia.com> PSA: Do not use #freenode_#tc39:matrix.org . It is not logged, and does not reliably propagate messages to anywhere in particular Wasn't it suppose to be the bridge channel? [00:08:20.0260] I read the notes and folks expressed preference for switching over completely over bridging. [00:09:12.0891] I agree with the idea, but would people be against setting up a temporary bridge for the course of this meeting? [00:12:38.0738] (since the majority of discussion would happen on IRC this time still and it might help someone stay connected via Matrix) [00:19:25.0210] Bridging just doesn't seem to work. I think we have to decide when we want to transition instead [00:19:55.0151] +1 to transitioning completely once we're ready. [00:20:34.0173] But I don't think bridging is as imperfect as you might think, it does relay messages across and could work for just these two days. [00:20:39.0933] we already knew, going into this process, that bridges to and from IRC are unreliable in general. Now, we're seeing that unreliability in practice already. [00:20:46.0645] * But I don't think bridging is as imperfect as you might think, it does relay messages across and could work for just these two days. [00:22:01.0547] Wait, did we set up a bridge at some point? I might be missing something, but which bridge's unreliability is being discussed here? [00:22:36.0542] some people expected #freenode_#tc39:matrix.org to send messages to TC39's main IRC channel. However, it seems to propagate some people's messages and not others [00:22:51.0464] so, if you want to communicate with people, using that channel is probably a bad idea [00:23:11.0776] oh, I wasn't on that channel! Let me look around. Maybe there's something with the configuration? [00:24:00.0469] all the freenode channels just automatically exist, if I understand correctly [00:24:22.0672] right, I wasn't on it either, but this is the whole logging discussion that ljharb and I were having on #tc39 IRC [00:24:46.0605] > <@dehrenberg:igalia.com> all the freenode channels just automatically exist, if I understand correctly oh right, it is the automatic room set up via appservice. [00:24:47.0108] Yeah that channel/bridge did not work for me at all [00:25:11.0946] I don't really get appservice's bridged channels [00:25:19.0452] so I get where you're coming from now. [00:25:59.0089] when I was talking of bridging, I was talking about setting up an integration/bot that relays messages between this channel and the IRC channel [00:26:09.0527] without the need for that weird autogenerated channel [00:26:18.0543] that has worked much smoother in my experience too [00:26:38.0042] but yeah, if you want to test it out, I could temporarily set it up. [00:26:47.0045] right, it's like: if someone actually puts in the technical work, maybe we could have a bridge, but until then, we have to tell people explicitly not to use this broken thing [00:27:02.0173] Rob fell into this trap, and others probably will as well, as they try Matrix [00:27:39.0968] no no, if you're using Element, you can use the pane on the right-hand side to set up the bridge. [00:27:53.0872] there are pre-built bridges for IRC and Slack [00:27:56.0403] well, I dunno, if you know how to do this, then great [00:28:20.0179] I could set it up temporarily for a little while today maybe? [00:28:27.0519] sure [00:28:27.0678] and then we can decide if we want to keep it off? [00:28:33.0814] sgtm [00:28:52.0880] could you give me admin role or use the right-side pane to set it up? [00:29:05.0674] 👍 [00:35:39.0580] (should all delegates be admins here? what's the policy?) [00:38:00.0408] (I don't know if we should give admin permissions to all delegates, we can give a custom role without moderation powers though) [00:38:38.0989] Ideally only the chairs should have admin and maybe some folks could have moderator permissions. [00:38:56.0132] Last discussion on that was here https://github.com/tc39/inclusion-group/issues/16#issue-797039045 2021-03-09 2021-03-10 2021-03-11 2021-03-12 2021-03-13 2021-03-14 2021-03-15 2021-03-16 2021-03-17 2021-03-18 2021-03-19 2021-03-20 2021-03-21 2021-03-22 2021-03-23 2021-03-24 2021-03-25 2021-03-26 2021-03-27 2021-03-28 2021-03-29 2021-03-30 2021-03-31