Skip to content
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.

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

MSC3892: Custom Emotes with Encryption #3892

Open
wants to merge 22 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

nmscode
Copy link

@nmscode nmscode commented Sep 14, 2022

Rendered

Related MSCs: MSC2545 and MSC1951

Implementation PRs

Element web: matrix-org/matrix-react-sdk#9240

Hosted Implementation:

https://pr9240--matrix-react-sdk.netlify.app/

Implemented but not PR yet

Element android: https://github.com/nmscode/element-android

@nmscode nmscode changed the title MSCXXX: Custom Emotes with Encryption MSC3892: Custom Emotes with Encryption Sep 14, 2022
@nmscode nmscode marked this pull request as ready for review September 14, 2022 23:22
@anoadragon453 anoadragon453 added proposal A matrix spec change proposal client-server Client-Server API kind:feature MSC for not-core and not-maintenance stuff needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. labels Sep 15, 2022
@anoadragon453
Copy link
Member

I've added a needs-implementation label as part of the typical "new MSC" flow. I have yet to look at the linked implementation to see if it accurately reflects the MSC.

@turt2live
Copy link
Member

It's been mentioned OOB that this has an implementation and so should be safe to remove the needs-implementation label, however I believe that we're not quite there yet. It's great to see that this has active implementations in Element, though for a feature of this size, scale, and importance it's more valuable to have several clients adopt the MSC as an implicit show of support for the technical direction. Specifically, we'd want to see clients with implementation in front of users for enough time to reveal any usability issues.

For clarity, this does not need to be done in Element either. Element can serve as one of the implementations (if adopted), but generally would be a small percentage of the overall consideration.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
client-server Client-Server API kind:feature MSC for not-core and not-maintenance stuff 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
Projects
Status: Scheduled - v1.10
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants