Pavel Simerda wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:52:13 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:+1 to not changing XEP-0045 -- I'd prefer to push it to Final soon, not tinker with it forever.Are you sure it's good enough for final?
Yes, I am. XEP-0001 states:"In order for a XEP to advance from Draft status to Final status (version 2.0), it must be shown to be stable and well-received by the Jabber/XMPP developer community."
XEP-0045 has been Draft since 2002 with very few changes since 2006, thus I think it is stable.
XEP-0045 has been widely implemented and deployed in clients, servers, and components, thus I think it has been well-received by the developer community.
I note:1. Are there things I would change in XEP-0045 if we were starting over? Yes, there are (e.g., to me the status codes are ugly and I'd prefer XML elements). But I don't think we want to make such changes at this point because they are mostly aesthetic.
2. Would I like to complete a full review of the specification to clean up the requirements language (MAY/SHOULD/MUST) and so on? Yes I would.
3. Would I like various implementations to do some interoperability testing so that we're sure there are no major interop problems? Yes I would.
I'd be most comfortable if we take care of #2 and #3 before we advance XEP-0045 to Final, but in general I do think that the spec is ready for advancement.
/psa
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
