On 17 June 2015 at 22:41, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/17/15 3:33 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: > >> I meant to say that Carbons wasn't even on there before, whereas it's >> now pretty much essential. >> > > Agreed with respect to the technology. With respect to the process, the > Carbons XEP is still Experimental. I think that it's not right to make a > XEP part of a compliance suite if it's still Experimental. But that can be > solved by moving the XEP forward on the standards track. Well, I think it's OK (and possibly even useful) to include Experimental extensions in the compliance suite while the suite is itself Experimental. As I said to Sam, I think it'd be useful to build the shopping list, and then we can figure out where additional work is needed. Dave.
