Skip to content

MSC3572: Relation aggregation cleanup #3572

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
bwindels wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

MSC3572: Relation aggregation cleanup #3572

bwindels wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@bwindels
Copy link
Contributor

@bwindels bwindels commented Dec 16, 2021 •
edited by turt2live
Loading

@bwindels bwindels mentioned this pull request Dec 16, 2021
Merged
uhoreg
uhoreg reviewed Dec 16, 2021
View reviewed changes
proposals/3572-aggregation-cleanup.md
[`unsigned`](https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/client-server-api/#room-event-fields)
field.

the CNSIG is really meant for things that are very likely to be extended by
Copy link
Member

@uhoreg uhoreg Dec 16, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
the CNSIG is really meant for things that are very likely to be extended by
The CNSIG is really meant for things that are very likely to be extended by

Also, what is "CNSIG"?

@uhoreg uhoreg added kind:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. proposal A matrix spec change proposal proposal-in-review labels Dec 16, 2021
clokep
clokep reviewed Jun 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
clokep
clokep reviewed Jun 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
@clokep
Copy link
Member

clokep commented Jun 27, 2024

Although I agree it is unfortunate that unsigned has a mixed of namespaced and unnamespaced parameters I do not think it is worth the churn to remove the prefix.

Additionally, MSC4115 showed that it is useful to have (unstable) prefixes as an option in unsigned.

@mscbot fcp close

@mscbot
Copy link
Collaborator

mscbot commented Jun 27, 2024 •
edited by KitsuneRal
Loading

Team member @clokep has proposed to close this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged people:

Once at least 75% of reviewers approve (and there are no outstanding concerns), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

See this document for information about what commands tagged team members can give me.

@mscbot mscbot added proposed-final-comment-period Currently awaiting signoff of a majority of team members in order to enter the final comment period. disposition-close labels Jun 27, 2024
@mscbot
Copy link
Collaborator

mscbot commented Jul 13, 2024

πŸ”” This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. πŸ””

@mscbot mscbot added final-comment-period This MSC has entered a final comment period in interest to approval, postpone, or delete in 5 days. and removed proposed-final-comment-period Currently awaiting signoff of a majority of team members in order to enter the final comment period. labels Jul 13, 2024
@mscbot
Copy link
Collaborator

mscbot commented Jul 18, 2024

The final comment period, with a disposition to close, as per the review above, is now complete.

@mscbot mscbot closed this Jul 18, 2024
@mscbot mscbot added finished-final-comment-period and removed disposition-close final-comment-period This MSC has entered a final comment period in interest to approval, postpone, or delete in 5 days. labels Jul 18, 2024
@turt2live turt2live added rejected A proposal which has been rejected for inclusion in the spec and removed finished-final-comment-period labels Jul 23, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@clokep clokep clokep left review comments

@uhoreg uhoreg uhoreg left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

kind:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. proposal A matrix spec change proposal rejected A proposal which has been rejected for inclusion in the spec

Projects

Spec Core Team Workflow
Status: Merged

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@bwindels @clokep @mscbot @uhoreg @turt2live