On 6 Dec 2017 13:28, "Kevin Smith" <kevin.sm...@isode.com> wrote:
On 29 Nov 2017, at 16:42, Jonas Wielicki <jo...@wielicki.name> wrote: > > Present: Dave (Chair), Kevin, Georg, Daniel, Sam > Minutes: Yours truly. > > Chat logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council/2017-11-29#15:55:08 > > > 1. XEP-0387 (Compliance Suites 2018), vote to move to Draft > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > The Last Call expired at 2017-11-15. Kevin objects that the Council may have > to re-issue the Last Call because the current Last Call was issued by the > previous Council and no decision on advancement was made subsequently. > > Since it is not clear that there is any process requiring Council to do so and > no value is seen in re-issuing the LC, no new LC is issued and the vote is on > advancement to Draft. I note that this isn’t quite right - the process here is that a new LC is required (as I noted in the meeting). The reason given in XEP-0001 (I had the rule swapped in, but not the reason, at the time) is that previous Council may have not given feedback publicly (because they have their say in Council), and the new LC gives the previous Council a chance to publicly express opinions to inform new Council’s votes. On that basis, I do feel like we should probably do things properly and re-issue the LC, so I’m -1 on advancement without that step. /K Let's just issue another LC, then. While I agree it'd be lovely to get the XEP done this year, it's not the end of the world and I don't see that arguing about it will solve anything (especially if XEP-0001 has this in the process). Dave.
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
