SamWhitedYah, I have no recollection of which of these have been covered or not
jonas’Guus’ PR wasn’t
jonas’it was discussed, but Guus made updates to it
jonas’the XEP-0198 one
jonas’(discussed and rejected back then)
jonas’(but now changes)
jonas’that one, exactly, thanks, Ge0rG
guus.der.kinderen(hargh, I got disconnected from this muc again. Please disregard my last comment, if it came through)
Ge0rGI like the changes (I think I liked the old one as well), but it's got typos: "to" instead of "too"
SamWhitedguus.der.kinderen: I don't think it did, you're safe :)
danielI'm still in favor of that one. (I was the one who suggested it in the first place)
guus.der.kinderenYup, Daniel made me do it.
Ge0rGguus.der.kinderen: would you fix the "too"s?
guus.der.kinderenGe0rG: what's that? Spelling?
Ge0rGso we have...
#3 Items for voting: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/579 "Add handled-count-too-high specification"
Ge0rG+1 with the typos fixed.
guus.der.kinderenGe0rG: will fix
danielI switched to desktop and the messages I sent from there don't arrive...
SamWhitedI'm +1 as well if we're making this official; this makes good sense
Ge0rGGreat. I suppose Kev and Dave will on-list then.
Ge0rGdaniel: there it is
danielWell at least sm works
Ge0rGhttps://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/591 "XEP-0050 Ad-Hoc Commands: Clarify 'execute' actions equivalence" was VETOed according to the Table Of Doom, as was the competing #598. Anybody remembers what the next steps with those are?
SamWhitedI think we just close it and if the author wants to change things and submit a new PR that's fine. Did we have feedback? I vaguely remember that having more optional stuff didn't feel good, but don't remember the specifics
Ge0rGIn February, Kev suggested to do a rewording of the text to make the intention clear.
SamWhitedSeems like we can close it to clean up the PRs with a note about that then, I'll leave something.
SamWhitedOh, I was about to say "wait, there is a new protoxep, how did I miss this?" but daniel just submitted it
Ge0rGSorry, looks like my desktop client got DoSed by presence.
Ge0rGSo it's over time, we don't have a clean agenda and not much of discussion either. Wrap it up and aim for +1W?
Ge0rGOur work here is done.
Link Mauveguus.der.kinderen, you still have a s/to/too/ to do, here: “by sending an 'h' value that is to high”
Link MauveAlso, is is “a undefined-condition” or “an undefined-condition”?
Link MauveAlso s/handled-count-to-high/handled-count-too-high/
guus.der.kinderenLink Mauve: can you edit the pr? I'm not near my laptop for the rest of the day.
Link MauveOh wow, I indeed can! :o
Link MauveNever saw that.
Link MauveTheir online editor fails the search feature though. ^^'