On Sonntag, 13. Januar 2019 16:12:04 CET Sam Whited wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2019, at 11:26, Jonas Schäfer wrote: > > On Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2018 18:05:26 CET Georg Lukas wrote: > > > * Jonas Schäfer <[email protected]> [2018-12-08 20:06]: > > > > Title: XMPP Compliance Suites 2019 > > > > > > thanks for taking up the work! > > > Some remarks: > > > > > > IMO XEP-0184 is sufficiently important to become IM-Core, not just > > > IM-Advanced. > > > > I don’t think so. But same as for XEP-0333, if there are more voices in > > favour, I’m happy to change that. > > To both of these feedbacks I'd say the same thing: when we have old > compliance suites we look incompetent. This isn't a delay that we can put > down to not having enough volunteers.
Yes, we can put this down to not having enough volunteers. You stepped down from doing the CS, which I can understand. There weren’t many volunteers to pick them up, at all (more below). Note that the suites will go through LC anyways, so I’m doing my best to avoid a second LC iteration by pushing updates and asking for feedback ahead of time. > Just get it out by the date on the > title, if something isn't quite right we'll have another shot at revising > them next year. That’s what’s happening right now, because see at the bottom of the mail. > It's several weeks into 2019, and we just look silly having > the 2018 compliance suites be official. There are other things which make the community look much sillier. Including having important extensions in Deferred or Experimental state. I prefer it if people sink their energy into that. > If there really wasn't enough time > to address feedback, then we should have gotten it to the council earlier. I agree. I messed up by underestimating my workload around the time I should’ve started the work on them. Nobody took up the work (or asked me whether they should), so, I’m rather confident that we don’t have any more volunteers to work on them. I also think that the process how we work on the CS isn’t quite right, and I have a modification in mind for next year’s, but that’s for then. I see your point, and you raised it last year, too. Re-iterating it in a 48 hour interval on the list will do nothing except draining more precious time from me and others by having to read and possibly reply to the email. If you want to help with the process, please skim the list archives and point me to feedback which I haven’t addressed with an update or a direct reply yet, so that I can incorporate it in an update before the next council meeting. Thanks. 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] _______________________________________________
