[Standards] On making "Compliance Suite 20xx" a Non-XEP

Jonas Wielicki jonas at wielicki.name
Tue Feb 7 20:08:16 UTC 2017


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

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.

> Cons:
> 
> - 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  
updated.

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.

regards,
jwi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=WjeN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Standards mailing list