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

Move account data types out of events #732

Open
jplatte opened this issue Sep 29, 2021 · 4 comments
Open

Move account data types out of events #732

jplatte opened this issue Sep 29, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@jplatte
Copy link
Member

jplatte commented Sep 29, 2021

Account data doesn't really have anything to do with events, even if the spec currently calls it that. See also https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues/3405.

@jplatte jplatte self-assigned this Sep 29, 2021
@jplatte jplatte changed the title Move account data out of ruma-events Move account data types out of ruma-events Sep 29, 2021
@jplatte jplatte added this to the 0.5.0 milestone Sep 29, 2021
@jplatte

This comment was marked as outdated.

@jplatte jplatte removed their assignment Feb 12, 2022
@jplatte jplatte modified the milestones: 0.5.0, 0.6.0 Feb 12, 2022
@jplatte jplatte self-assigned this Feb 13, 2022
@jplatte jplatte modified the milestones: 0.6.0, 0.5.0 Feb 13, 2022
@jplatte
Copy link
Member Author

jplatte commented Feb 13, 2022

Maybe I'll do this as part of 0.5.0. It's an interesting work item. By moving these out, matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals#686 also becomes a little more approachable I think.

@jplatte
Copy link
Member Author

jplatte commented Feb 13, 2022

I'm a little torn on the naming here though. I think in terms of the SDK, it makes sense for these JSON objects to still be named "events" because they are also returned by /sync and you can subscribe to updates for them using client.register_event_handler right now.

This was referenced Mar 4, 2022
@jplatte jplatte changed the title Move account data types out of ruma-events Move account data types out of events Mar 16, 2022
@jplatte
Copy link
Member Author

jplatte commented Mar 16, 2022

After attempting a clean split in #972 I found that that causes too much duplication. Also account data and other things the spec calls "events" still have in common that they're received in the sync response.

I'm still thinking it could be useful to have a separate feature flag / module structure for account data, but the derives will likely stay the same ones.

@jplatte jplatte removed their assignment Mar 16, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant