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

Proposal to improve /createRoom #3809

Open
turt2live opened this issue Jun 22, 2018 · 5 comments
Open

Proposal to improve /createRoom #3809

turt2live opened this issue Jun 22, 2018 · 5 comments
Labels
client-server Client-Server API kind:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec 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

Comments

@turt2live
Copy link
Member

turt2live commented Jun 22, 2018

Documentation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HM5ANCyrqXVGVLERzZkYI_3x2_KpYYmtWZXnFdIV66k/edit?usp=sharing
PRs: #1326
Related: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues/1331

@turt2live turt2live changed the title Proposal to deprecate several fields on /createRoom Proposal to improve /createRoom Jun 22, 2018
@turt2live
Copy link
Member Author

@Half-Shot and @jcgruenhage please be aware that the scope of this proposal has changed. Pinging because you've thumbed-up it so far.

@jcgruenhage
Copy link
Contributor

@turt2live I'd still say it's fine.

@Half-Shot
Copy link
Contributor

I've got no issues with it either

@jcgruenhage
Copy link
Contributor

Actually, no, I don't think we need to require a state key here, defaulting to an empty state key here feels better. While the presence of a state key makes a state event, this API is supposed to build state events, so it is implied to exist. Given that https://matrix.org/docs/spec/client_server/r0.3.0.html#put-matrix-client-r0-rooms-roomid-state-eventtype-statekey says The state_key for the state to send. Defaults to the empty string. I think that defaulting to an empty state key is fine.

@turt2live
Copy link
Member Author

(note: we're arguing about this actively in #matrix-spec, proposal may be updated further)

@turt2live turt2live added the proposal A matrix spec change proposal label Jul 10, 2018
@turt2live turt2live added the client-server Client-Server API label Sep 6, 2018
@turt2live turt2live added the kind:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec label Apr 21, 2020
@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
@richvdh richvdh transferred this issue from matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals Mar 1, 2022
@ara4n ara4n transferred this issue from matrix-org/matrix-spec May 9, 2022
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:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec 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
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants