Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MSC2240: Room version 6 #2240

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
May 25, 2020
Merged

MSC2240: Room version 6 #2240

merged 5 commits into from
May 25, 2020

Conversation

turt2live
Copy link
Member

@turt2live turt2live commented Aug 22, 2019

Rendered

For links, here's the MSCs included:

  • MSC2209 - Including notifications in power level auth rules.
  • MSC2432 - Alias event authorisation and redaction.
  • MSC2540 - Integers in canonical JSON compliance.

@turt2live turt2live added the proposal A matrix spec change proposal label Aug 22, 2019
@turt2live turt2live changed the title [WIP] Room version 6 [WIP] MSC2240: Room version 6 Aug 22, 2019
@ara4n
Copy link
Member

ara4n commented Aug 27, 2019

should we try to squeeze #2244 into here too?

@richvdh
Copy link
Member

richvdh commented Aug 27, 2019

should we try to squeeze #2244 into here too?

To be honest, I think it's unwise to set expectations that a given feature will or will not be in a given room version, particularly while that feature is still very much in development, since we end up in a situation where we never release the features we have because we are continually waiting for the next one that is almost-not-quite-ready-to-release.

(The same is true of a number of the other MSCs listed, fwiw: the rate of progress on their implementation is currently very low, and I think it's premature to propose them for room v6)

Let's wait until we think we have some things actually ready for release in a new room version, and decide then whether it's worth defining the room version at that point, or waiting for more features.

@ara4n
Copy link
Member

ara4n commented Aug 27, 2019

i guess i was coming at this from the perspective of: "here is the backlog of MSCs which require a new room version; when we next cut a room version we should decide which are stable enough to merit inclusion so we don't forget any" rather than "let's block v6 on #2244".

@richvdh
Copy link
Member

richvdh commented Aug 27, 2019

fair enough. I think we're using the unassigned-room-version label for that though.

@turt2live
Copy link
Member Author

I did intend to include 2244 in v6 but I guess the collective answer is no?

We have a lot pending implementation, as always, however in this case I'd rather delay release than have many pointless versions.

Also it's worth noting I've talked to exactly noone on this, which is why it's a WIP.

@turt2live turt2live added the kind:core MSC which is critical to the protocol's success label Apr 20, 2020
@turt2live
Copy link
Member Author

This is now ready for general review with the inclusion of the 3 MSCs we aim to target. There's a bunch of MSCs which are excluded, but if they happen to get enough of an implementation in time then they can certainly be added.

@turt2live turt2live marked this pull request as ready for review May 13, 2020 21:14
@turt2live turt2live changed the title [WIP] MSC2240: Room version 6 MSC2240: Room version 6 May 13, 2020
proposals/2240-rooms-v6.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@richvdh richvdh self-requested a review May 14, 2020 16:46
@anoadragon453
Copy link
Member

This lgtm matches my expectation as well. Most people seem in agreement so:

@mscbot fcp merge

@mscbot
Copy link
Collaborator

mscbot commented May 15, 2020

Team member @anoadragon453 has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged people:

Concerns:

  • The MSCs aren't in FCP

Once at least 75% of reviewers approve (and there are no outstanding concerns), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

See this document for information about what commands tagged team members can give me.

@mscbot mscbot added disposition-merge proposed-final-comment-period Currently awaiting signoff of a majority of team members in order to enter the final comment period. labels May 15, 2020
@turt2live
Copy link
Member Author

@mscbot concern The MSCs aren't in FCP

@anoadragon453
Copy link
Member

All listed MSCs have now entered FCP.

@mscbot resolve The MSCs aren't in FCP

@mscbot
Copy link
Collaborator

mscbot commented May 20, 2020

🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔

@mscbot mscbot added final-comment-period This MSC has entered a final comment period in interest to approval, postpone, or delete in 5 days. and removed proposed-final-comment-period Currently awaiting signoff of a majority of team members in order to enter the final comment period. labels May 20, 2020
@turt2live turt2live mentioned this pull request May 21, 2020
@turt2live
Copy link
Member Author

Spec PR (for when this leaves FCP): #2563

@mscbot
Copy link
Collaborator

mscbot commented May 25, 2020

The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete.

@mscbot mscbot added finished-final-comment-period and removed disposition-merge final-comment-period This MSC has entered a final comment period in interest to approval, postpone, or delete in 5 days. labels May 25, 2020
@turt2live turt2live added spec-pr-in-review A proposal which has been PR'd against the spec and is in review and removed finished-final-comment-period labels May 25, 2020
@turt2live turt2live merged commit 5b0e94c into master May 25, 2020
@turt2live turt2live deleted the travis/msc/rooms-v6 branch May 25, 2020 13:41
@richvdh richvdh added merged A proposal whose PR has merged into the spec! and removed spec-pr-in-review A proposal which has been PR'd against the spec and is in review labels Jul 29, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind:core MSC which is critical to the protocol's success merged A proposal whose PR has merged into the spec! proposal A matrix spec change proposal
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants