ok so! little refresh: polyproto is the WIP federation protocol that aims to be simple and build on existing, robust tech and protocols instead of re-inventing the wheel, while avoiding complexity from i.e state-resolution or extension fragmentation.
Polyproto is also on fedi at @polyproto, and is part of the @polyphonychat project which eventually aims to use this protocol to build a chat platform.
@Gnuxie@alexia As alexia already helpfully alluded to, if XMPPs XEPs are Lego-Bricks, then polyproto extensions are Duplos. Tech-standards integrate technologies into the protocol in a reusable way, while application standards define an application skeleton fit to federate with other implementation following the same standard.
@alexia@polyproto Nice, that looks clean. I like that no attempt is made to merge extensions into the core in the way that SCT does with MSCs. It's something I have wondered about.
I don't really see a fundamental difference to the process beyond that though. And on the Matrix side I've been trying to show people that their issue rarely is with the MSC process at all. They just want to abuse that process to coerce maintainers into implementing their MSC. Which is backwards.
@alexia@polyproto ie it's backwards because the conversation can and should happen while the proposal is a proposal. If it can't, there are other issues going on like resources. And the MSC being spec won't change that.
yeah we don't want p2 to become a monolithic spec like matrix is, we wanna embrace that there'll be different needs and featuresets and as such build a good extension process around that
1
1
