Bumping this thread.
If you know anyone who has stakes in pubsub but might not read this
list please refer them to this thread or this PR.
Feedback is very welcome. I'm not 100% sure myself which of the three
PRs is the best solution; But we have to do something. (At least merge
#555 which has th
After some discussion on the XSF MUC I created a third alternative
which has the added benefit of making the language in that section a
lot clearer.
https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/557
2017-12-08 14:20 GMT+01:00 Daniel Gultsch :
> Hi,
>
> XEP-0048, XEP-0223 and possibly others are referencing a
On 11 Dec 2017, at 12:42, Daniel Gultsch wrote:
>
> 2017-12-11 13:30 GMT+01:00 Kevin Smith :
>> From a ‘not breaking xep60’ point of view, could one reasonably argue that
>> the latter is equivalent in effect to registering a whole load of publish
>> options, which implementations must be happy
2017-12-11 13:30 GMT+01:00 Kevin Smith :
> From a ‘not breaking xep60’ point of view, could one reasonably argue that
> the latter is equivalent in effect to registering a whole load of publish
> options, which implementations must be happy with already?
Yes. It doesn't break anything it just sp
On 8 Dec 2017, at 13:20, Daniel Gultsch wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> XEP-0048, XEP-0223 and possibly others are referencing a
> publish-option called 'persist-item'. XEP-0060 says that any
> publish-options MUST be registered. This hasn't happened yet.
>
> Here is a pull request that does: https://github
Hi,
XEP-0048, XEP-0223 and possibly others are referencing a
publish-option called 'persist-item'. XEP-0060 says that any
publish-options MUST be registered. This hasn't happened yet.
Here is a pull request that does: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/555
(editors will still have to pull this into
