From 62cc11eee658ead69eb18cad153193a4082daa1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Richard van der Hoff Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 13:49:54 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] add missing github-labels file --- README.rst | 2 +- meta/github-labels.rst | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 meta/github-labels.rst diff --git a/README.rst b/README.rst index b8847bfb..ace8ebdd 100644 --- a/README.rst +++ b/README.rst @@ -138,4 +138,4 @@ Issue tracking Issues with the Matrix specification are tracked in `GitHub `_. -See `meta/labels.rst `_ for notes on what the labels mean. +See `meta/github-labels.rst `_ for notes on what the labels mean. diff --git a/meta/github-labels.rst b/meta/github-labels.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..f674b81b --- /dev/null +++ b/meta/github-labels.rst @@ -0,0 +1,91 @@ +The following labels are used to help categorize issues: + +`spec-omission `_ +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +Things which have been implemented but not currently specified. These may range +from entire API endpoints, to particular options or return parameters. + +Issues with this label will have been implemented in `Synapse +`_. Normally there will be a design +document in Google Docs or similar which describes the feature. + +Examples: + +* `Spec PUT /directory/list `_ +* `Unspec'd server_name request param for /join/{roomIdOrAlias} + `_ + +`clarification `_ +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +An area where the spec could do with being more explicit. + +Examples: + +* `Spec the implicit limit on /syncs + `_ + +* `Clarify the meaning of the currently_active flags in presence events + `_ + +`spec-bug `_ +---------------------------------------------------------------------- + +Something which is in the spec, but is wrong. + +Note: this is *not* for things that are badly designed or don't work well +(for which see 'improvement' or 'feature') - it is for places where the +spec doesn't match reality. + +Examples: + +* `swagger is wrong for directory PUT + `_ + +* `receipts section still refers to initialSync + `_ + +`improvement `_ +---------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +A suggestion for a relatively simple improvement to the protocol. + +Examples: + +* `We need a 'remove 3PID' API so that users can remove mappings + `_ +* `We should mandate that /publicRooms requires an access_token + `_ + +`feature `_ +-------------------------------------------------------------------- + +A suggestion for a significant extension to the matrix protocol which +needs considerable consideration before implementation. + +Examples: + +* `Peer-to-peer Matrix `_ +* `Specify a means for clients to "edit" previous messages + `_ + + +`wart `_ +-------------------------------------------------------------- + +A point where the protocol is inconsistent or inelegant, but which isn't really +causing anybody any problems right now. Might be nice to consider fixing one +day. + + +`question `_ +---------------------------------------------------------------------- + +A thought or idea about the protocol which we aren't really sure whether to +pursue or not. + +Examples: + +* `Should we prepend anti-eval code to our json responses? + `_