[Standards] On making "Compliance Suite 20xx" a Non-XEP
jonas at wielicki.name
Tue Feb 7 20:08:16 UTC 2017
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Some comments, I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other.
On Dienstag, 7. Februar 2017 17:25:40 CET Georg Lukas wrote:
> - it would be great to have a stable link/identifier to spread to
> developers and reference in documentation
Being able to link to a specific version (release year) would still be
necessary, so the XEP-with-fixed-number-approach seems fitting.
> - developers couldn't just stamp "implements XEP-0375" on their release
> to indicate a given level of compliance, they would rather need
> to write "Implements Compliance Suite 2017"
IMO, That’s a feature. "Nobody" knows what XEP-0375 is. "Implements Compliance
Suite 2017" is much clearer.
> - having this as a non-XEP might increase the maintenance burden or
> reduce the "credibility" of the document
This doesn’t seem to apply if it is kept as a XEP which is continuously
This XEP could use version numbers based on dates, so that it is easy to
reference the specific version of the Compliance Suite which was implemented.
Either in the form of year.patchlevel or year.month.patchlevel, if we want to
futere-proof it against a more frequent release cycle in the future.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Standards