does council monitor PRs to the XEPs repository or do I have to forward that to council?
jonasw
and if so, what’s the current modus operandi to do that?
danielhas left
ralphmhas joined
ralphmhas joined
Flow
jonasw, which kind of PRs are we talking about?
jonasw
anything which needs council 😺
Flow
So ProtoXEP submissions and Last Calls. But I think for those we have editor sending annoucement mails
jonasw
I'm talking about changes to Draft+ XEPs
jonasw
(sorry I'm on mobile. protoxeps can be merged instantly, last calls are issued by editors so they don't need council btw)
Flow
Ahh, not sure if I ever saw an editor annoucing a proposed change to a draft xep, probably a good idea to establish those though. I wouldn't want council to monitor PRs and such, plus xep1 wants a standards@ discussion of those changes too
danielhas left
danielhas joined
daniel
Maybe even provide a rendered version to the standards list.
daniel
Then it's easier for the broader community to follow
daniel
Arguably though it is also kinda the responsibility of who ever created the PR
jonasw
in this case, me 😺
jonasw
I suppose it has to wait for next year then 😺
jerehas joined
Syndacehas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
jerehas joined
genofirehas joined
jcbrandhas joined
Ge0rGhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
jcbrandhas left
jcbrandhas left
Kevhas left
ralphmhas left
ralphmhas left
jonaswhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
ralphmhas left
ralphmhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
SouLhas left
ralphmhas joined
SouLhas left
jcbrandhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
ralphmhas left
jonaswhas left
genofirehas left
ralphmhas left
ralphmhas left
ralphmhas joined
SamWhitedhas joined
Ge0rG
What are the criteria for a Council member to decide about the approval of a ProtoXEP? XEP-0001 §5 does not provide any hints except that we need to vote.
Ge0rG
The only reason I can immediately see to -1 a protoXEP is that it covers a use case that already was addressed by an existing XEP.
jcbrandhas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
jcbrandhas left
jcbrandhas joined
SamWhited
I generally think about whether or not it's implementable in its current form. If it's not I don't want it to end up sitting in experimental in an unusable state forever.
Ge0rG
SamWhited: I don't like the protoxep limbo we have, where the author has submitted something, and before it has been voted upon there is already a new revision on the author's homepage.
Ge0rG
So I'd rather tend to accept even very raw things, just to keep the wheels turning
ralphmhas joined
SouLhas left
SamWhitedhas left
Syndacehas joined
vanitasvitaehas joined
ralphmhas joined
Flow
Ge0rG, so you would not have accepted MAM?
Ge0rG
Flow: I don't think it covers the exact same use case as 136
SamWhited
I don't mind "very raw things", it just needs to be in a state where every other section isn't a TODO.
SamWhited
But I agree about things that overlap in use case; sometimes things just need a replacement, but we don't need three alternatives to everything.