-
goffi
Daniel, have you noticed https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1505? There is no rush at all, just want to be sure that it's not missed.
-
Guus
Hi Council - I've applied changes to XEP-0377, in response to feedback from Last Call (I've motivated my changes on the standards list, in response to the Last Call announcement & feedback thread). The PR is in https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1506 - It is (automatically) labelled as 'Needs Author' - given that the I am an author, that seems wrong. I'm not sure what the procedure is now - does this go to Council (e.g. "Needs Council"), or does Editor needs to do things ("Needs Editor")?
-
singpolyma
I think since it's still effectively experimental and you are the author it doesn't need anything
-
singpolyma
However I would say that responding to last call feedback of "we wish this were more generically worded" with "here I've made it clearly less generically worded" is... a choice
-
Guus
It is, which I feel I have motivated. Much of the feedback was: "the XEP is OK". Some feedback was: "it's target scope may be ambiguous" with a subselection of people suggesting that the XEP should be more generic. I've opted to make the scope less ambiguous, but not make it a generic scope.
-
Guus
(as well as addressing a few unrelated concerns)