Attempt to clarify how the state restriction works for lazy-loading
#2754
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The "Like other members..." paragraph was confusing to people as it implied that it affected non-lazy-loading clients, which is technically true but also not. Clients can filter the
statesection of a sync without lazy-loading, but with lazy-loading they don't get a choice. Why a client would filter out membership events is beyond the scope of this PR.The idea behind the diff is to try and link the paragraph previous to the confusing one, as it was originally intended when this was being added to the spec in the first place. A further clarifying statement is also introduced to try and de-confuse any remaining thoughts after reading the thing.
Overall I'm not super convinced this solves the problem, but it's at least a step towards sanity?