[Council] proto-JEP: Message Archiving
temas at box5.net
Fri Apr 30 10:09:30 CDT 2004
On Apr 29, 2004, at 8:27 PM, Robert Norris wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 07:06:54AM -0500, Thomas Muldowney wrote:
>> I have a problem. This seems to completely disregard 13 and not work
>> with it at all. I would like to see an attempt at integration with
>> that, or actual discussion about why that is completely not possible,
>> preferably on the wiki.
> Agreed. But, surely thats for discussion on standards-jig, once we've
> accepted the JEP?
> I'd be interested in clarifying exactly what the point of Council
> approval of a JEP before it is published is. It can't actually be for
> protocol review - I think of it more as "do we see a need for this".
> IMO, it would be good to have a JEP for message archiving. That should
> be enough to get this thing published. Anything else is for s-jig and
> to discuss later.
> Robert Norris GPG: 1024D/FC18E6C2
> Email+Jabber: rob at cataclysm.cx Web: http://cataclysm.cx/
I discussed this at length with Justin, and I thought our (council)
previous discussions were coming to agreement to not completely accept
JEPs until they reach a further state. Part of the reason that we have
so many dead and dieing JEPs is just accepting ideas into the process.
Even when talking with Justin he told me this JEP is just a bit of an
idea that he had, he knew of JEP-13 and wanted to look into it, but he
wanted to get it out there. Well, why not get it out there on the wiki
and standards? Is this an idea that's larger than one person or are
there others that are actually interested in using and implementing it?
If they are, how would they do it? Processing like that would really
help us proceed with much more thorough and fast moving JEPs. I think
that rambling conveys my point. Any questions, comments?
More information about the Council