[Standards-JIG] Re: WHACK
stpeter at jabber.org
Mon May 1 19:34:24 UTC 2006
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 22:02, Tijl Houtbeckers wrote:
>> So what do PSA (JEP editor and responsible for stirring up the thread) and
>> Justin (who wrote JEP-ACK) think? Should this be resubmitted? Does Justin
>> still want to author it or should someone else take over?
> I'm fine working on JEP-Ack, if we can determine what I need to do to it and
> what the appropriate standards route is. Right now the JEP is rejected and
> the ack concept is an rfc3920bis candidate.
Your proposal was never accepted, so it never became a JEP. Therefore to
say that "the JEP is rejected" is untrue. Rejected means a proposal was
accepted as a JEP, was assigned a JEP number, and was subsequently voted
by the Jabber Council to a status of Rejected.
That said, it is possible that upon further reflection the 2005-2006
Jabber Council would accept your proposal as a JEP after this thread has
ended (perhaps along with proposals from Dave Cridland or others).
> I'd also like to see more serious discussion about Dave Cridland's proposal.
> I currently disagree with it, for reasons stated already, but I haven't seen
> anyone else paying attention to it. So far he's been nearly talking to
> himself in this thread, and I know how that can be. :)
Yes, I need to look at that more thoroughly myself, though I did post a
few messages in reply to Dave last week.
Jabber Software Foundation
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3641 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Standards