XSF Editor Team - 2018-08-06

https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/691/files Am I really supposed to create a revision block for that, reviving a XEP which hasn’t been touched for eight (!) years from Deferred?

okay, in this specific example it makes sense

there *has* been more interest in Moved recently

but I still don’t think that reviving it from Deferred is warranted just yet

I think the rule is just "anyone updates it, it moves back from deferred"

is an extremely simple typo fix an update?

Is there a reason not to?

it appears more active than it is

Experimental only says "There has been an update", not how interesting the update is.

Otherwise, we need a process for deciding which updates justify moving back from Deferred.

And that presumably has to be Council rather than Editor.

editorial vs. non-editorial?

And ... that seems heavyweight.

another question: what do people think of putting attic links into the notification emails?

In favour.

I see three benefits: 1. the links are stable in the sense that they point to the version the email is discussing and always will 2. I can send notification emails right away and don’t have to wait for the docker build process, because I build the attic myself 3. I am less likely to forget pushing the attic after an update because the links are needed for the emails

Seems like an editorial decision to me; this was the sort of thing I would never bother bumping for.

numbers are cheap

I'm not really arguing for this though. Not sure what to think. I guess if it's automated it doesn't really matter

you wish it was automated

;)

s/bumping/bumping or changing the state/