On Mittwoch, 1. November 2017 12:40:20 CET Matthew Wild wrote: > On 1 November 2017 at 12:35, Matthew Wild <[email protected]> wrote: > > As such, I've prepared a change of XEP-0001 here: > > https://github.com/mwild1/xeps/commit/9cebf36e11d5918352b49c1a3e27fec2f17d > > 8005 > Without my Board hat on... a couple of things jumped out at me with > this change (which currently is mostly a simple word replacement and > the addition of a note): > > 1) "Although [...] backwards-incompatible modifications shall be > avoided if at all possible, deployment of a Stable protocol in > mission-critical application may not be advisable." > > The name "Stable" implies that the specification is, well, stable. I > would suggest that we either remove or modify this sentence.
+1 for removing ", deployment […]" and "Although " (and possibly other modification inside "[...]" to make it make sense again). > 2) "In order for a XEP to advance from Stable status to Final status > (version 2.0), it must be shown to be stable and well-received by the > XMPP developer community." > > Here the text talks about the protocol needing to be "stable" before > it advances from Stable to Final. Again, this just feels a bit wrong, > and we might want to reconsider how we define the transition from > Stable -> Final. Something like the "12 months of inactivity" like PSA suggested seem sane. But see also my comments there. kind regards, Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
