On Mon, 16 Dec 2024, 20:58 Goffi, <[email protected]> wrote: > Le dimanche 15 décembre 2024, 15:57:13 heure normale d’Europe centrale > Dave Cridland a écrit : > > Hey hey, > > > > Boring incoming: > > > > https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1407 > > > > This is draft to avoid the XSF Board accidentally approving it before the > > community has had a chance to discuss. > > > > The main change is the paragraph added in Section 6 (Discussion Process), > > covering changes to the XEP during Experimental: > > > > The XEP author incorporates the feedback by creating source control > patches > > > (such as Pull Requests), in line with the preferred method in > &xep0143;. > > > Direct changes to an Experimental XEP, such as a contributor providing > a > > > patch (or Pull Request on GitHub), are still the responsibility of the > XEP > > > author, and are only applied if the XEP author agrees. If a XEP has > > > multiple authors, while agreement is sought from all authors, only > those > > > opinions from responsive authors are considered. If the Approving Body > > > feels that the XEP author is not responsive, another author may be > added > > > unilaterally by the Approving Body. > > > > > > This is trying to do two things: > > > > 1) Document the existing practice that the XMPP Council has followed, > > whereby changes to Experimental XEPs need "agreement" (PR approval, or > > similar) from the XEP Author. > > > > 2) Document the existing practice that the XMPP Council has followed. > > whereby if a XEP Author isn't responsive (ie, doesn't respond to emails, > > etc) the XMPP Council can add a new XEP Author. > > > > 3) Document the *new practice* that if a contribution isn't a PR, it's > the > > XEP Author who is responsible to turn it into one. > > > > The rest of the changes surface and restate existing process/policy/URLs > > and aren't that interesting (well, even less interesting). > > > > There is one additional possible process deviation we should document (or > > call the Process Police out, or something). Submission of a XEP, as per > > XEP-0143, occurs via email tot he Editor. Is this really still the case? > Or > > are these now by PR? That'll need changing in XEP-0143, which I'm happy > to > > do if that's the case. It'd be nice to have a non-PR variant of the > process > > (post here?) > > > > Dave. > > > > Hi Dave, > > Thank you for taking care of this. > For the record, experimental XEPs have already been changed without author > agreement, AFAIK mostly for minor stuff such as typos. It should probably > be written somewhere. >
Good point - I'll sprinkle the term "non-editorial" about. > Best, > Goffi > _______________________________________________ > Standards mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
