[Council] VOTE (major cleanup)

Thomas Muldowney temas at box5.net
Thu Oct 3 13:02:24 CDT 2002


On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 04:09:51PM -0500, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> OK, let's vote on some of the cleanup items we've been talking about. In
> order to move things to Rejected or Deferred I've done some weird things
> with +1 and -1 but I think it's better this way (see below).
> 
> JEP-0003 (PASS), version 0.4
> 
> This has been changed to Informational. Since there exist implementations,
> we are voting on moving this to Active. So +1 = Active, -1 = you have
> concerns.
> 

+1 -- Works fine as an informational jep

> JEP-0008 (User Avatars), version 0.1
> 
> Consensus is that Avatars would be good but that implementing something
> like this will require some of the pub/sub pieces. In line with pgm's
> email I move that we vote this to Active with the alternative being
> Deferred. So for this vote, we'll do +1 = Active, -1 = Deferred.
> 

-1 -- Still have to wait for the other tools to catch up to our amzing
forward thinking.

> JEP-0014 (Message Tone), version 0.2
> 
> Consensus is that this is addressed by the Emoticons JEP JEP-0038).  I
> move that we vote this to Active with the alternative being Rejected). So
> +1 = Active, -1 = Rejected.
> 

-1 -- I don't see the value add.  I like JoeH's idea of having something
similar to this in presence, but it could probably be better
accomplished with pubsub.  Ralphm uses something like that for his world
map.

> JEP-0015 (Account Transfer), version 0.4
> 
> Consensus is that there are major security issues etc. with this concept.  
> I move that we vote on moving this to Active with the alternative being
> Rejected. So +1 = Active, -1 = Rejected.
> 

-1 -- Security issues and missing much of the important information that
would need to be transferred.

> JEP-0017 (Naive Packet Framing Protocol), version 0.2
> 
> No known implementations. I move that we vote on moving this to Active
> with the alternative being Rejected. So +1 = Active, -1 = Rejected.
> 

-1 -- This has not been actively pursued by the author, but should be
remembered as we move forward with our transport layer.

> JEP-0025 (Jabber HTTP Polling), version 0.2
> 
> This is an Informational JEP documenting an existing implementation. I
> move that we vote on moving this to Active. So +1 = Active, -1 = you have
> concerns that need to be addressed.
> 

+1 -- Can't wait for a standards track version

> JEP-0037 (Data Stream Proxy Service), version 0.8
> 
> No implementations, may be superseded by JOBS (JEP-0042). Let's take a
> vote on moving this to Active, with +1 = Active and -1 = Rejected.
> 

-1 -- Anonymous authors are bogus (right KG? right.).  Plus, if we
already think it's going to be superseded, it would just waste
developers time.

--temas


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://jabber.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20021003/39576210/attachment.pgp


More information about the Council mailing list