Skip to content

Conversation

uhoreg
Copy link
Member

@uhoreg uhoreg commented Jul 7, 2020

Rendered

Replaces #1849 along with #2675, #2676, and #2677

New FCP: #2674 (comment)

Copy link
Member Author

@uhoreg uhoreg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Transfer comments from 1849

@uhoreg uhoreg changed the title MSCxxxx: Event Relationships MSC2674: Event Relationships Jul 7, 2020
@uhoreg uhoreg marked this pull request as ready for review July 7, 2020 21:34
@uhoreg uhoreg added kind:core MSC which is critical to the protocol's success proposal A matrix spec change proposal proposal-in-review labels Jul 7, 2020
@turt2live turt2live self-requested a review July 20, 2020 21:29
Copy link
Contributor

@kevincox kevincox left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think that we should support multiple relations, both of the same type and of differing types.

@turt2live turt2live added the needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. label Jun 8, 2021
Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <[email protected]>
@mscbot
Copy link
Collaborator

mscbot commented Nov 23, 2021

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

@mscbot mscbot added finished-final-comment-period and removed disposition-merge final-comment-period This MSC has entered a final comment period in interest to approval, postpone, or delete in 5 days. labels Nov 23, 2021
@turt2live turt2live merged commit c8e8b75 into matrix-org:old_master Nov 23, 2021
@turt2live turt2live added spec-pr-missing Proposal has been implemented and is being used in the wild but hasn't yet been added to the spec and removed finished-final-comment-period labels Nov 23, 2021
turt2live added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 23, 2021
* initial version of event relationship MSC

* fix MSC numbers

* clarifications

* mention multiple relations per event might be useful, but postpone for a future MSC

* mention MSC 3051 for proposed multiple relations

* remove send_relation endpoint

* move e2ee section under sending relations

* mention limitation of leaving server-side aggregations out for now

* remove mentions of m.reference, we'll sort that out in another MSC

* whitespace

* argument why m.relates_to should be preserved by redactions more general

but still give example of redacted edits

* deal with this in the comments

* clarify the conditions to meet for a relation

* mention specifically that this does not replace replies (yet)

* clarify how general rel_types should be

* clarify that gaps may cause clients to be unaware of some relations

* Update proposals/2674-event-relationships.md

Co-authored-by: DeepBlueV7.X <[email protected]>

* Update proposals/2674-event-relationships.md

Co-authored-by: DeepBlueV7.X <[email protected]>

* make wording clearer and move to bottom of section

* remove this as references are not defined here anymore

* clearer wording

* move edge cases to other relevant mscs

* clarify that a goal of sticking to this format is backwards compat.

* mention MSC 3267, to which m.reference has been extracted

* Update proposals/2674-event-relationships.md

Co-authored-by: Hubert Chathi <[email protected]>

* Update proposals/2674-event-relationships.md

Co-authored-by: Hubert Chathi <[email protected]>

* Update proposals/2674-event-relationships.md

Co-authored-by: Matthew Hodgson <[email protected]>

* Update proposals/2674-event-relationships.md

Co-authored-by: Matthew Hodgson <[email protected]>

* Update proposals/2674-event-relationships.md

Co-authored-by: Travis Ralston <[email protected]>

* wrap lines

* better wording

* this is singular, really

* add example of event shape

* specify how invalid relations should be treated by the redaction algorithm

* fix typo

* split up redactions changes in separate MSC

* also add new msc to introduction

* reword why not adopt m.in_reply_to

* remove guidelines how to pick rel_type

* mention that the target event must exist in the same room

* spell out the conscious (subject, object, verb) triple idea.

* Spelling

Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <[email protected]>

* remove paragraph saying what server should accept

* Revert "remove paragraph saying what server should accept"

This reverts commit e027133.

* further specify that a server should reject invalid relations through the cs api

* linebreak

Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: Bruno Windels <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: DeepBlueV7.X <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Matthew Hodgson <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Travis Ralston <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <[email protected]>
@turt2live turt2live added the blocked Something needs to be done before action can be taken on this PR/issue. label Dec 31, 2021
@turt2live turt2live removed the blocked Something needs to be done before action can be taken on this PR/issue. label May 5, 2022
@turt2live turt2live self-assigned this May 5, 2022
@turt2live
Copy link
Member

Spec PR: matrix-org/matrix-spec#1062

@turt2live turt2live added spec-pr-in-review A proposal which has been PR'd against the spec and is in review and removed spec-pr-missing Proposal has been implemented and is being used in the wild but hasn't yet been added to the spec labels May 27, 2022
@turt2live turt2live added merged A proposal whose PR has merged into the spec! and removed spec-pr-in-review A proposal which has been PR'd against the spec and is in review labels Jun 8, 2022
@turt2live
Copy link
Member

Merged 🎉

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind:core MSC which is critical to the protocol's success merged A proposal whose PR has merged into the spec! proposal A matrix spec change proposal
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.