Skip to content

chore: move old pdfs to proposals #330

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

chore: move old pdfs to proposals #330

wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

marcoscaceres
Copy link
Collaborator

Moving the PDFs to proposals folder, as they are not resources used by the spec itself.

@mohamedamir mohamedamir self-requested a review August 6, 2025 11:00
mohamedamir
mohamedamir approved these changes Aug 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mohamedamir mohamedamir left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM
Thank you!

timcappalli
timcappalli requested changes Aug 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@timcappalli timcappalli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please do not move these. They are important documents and are linked in many places.

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Please do not move these. They are important documents and are linked in many places.

Can you help me understand where from? git grep shows no matches.

These seem like not relevant to the spec and might confuse people? What are they for apart from being historical?

Also, wouldn't they be superseded by #306 ?

@c2bo
Copy link

c2bo commented Aug 8, 2025

Please do not move these. They are important documents and are linked in many places.

Can you help me understand where from? git grep shows no matches.

These seem like not relevant to the spec and might confuse people? What are they for apart from being historical?

Also, wouldn't they be superseded by #306 ?

I am pretty sure I've seen those pdfs being linked to externally from presentations etc.

@timcappalli
Copy link
Collaborator

Also, wouldn't they be superseded by #306 ?

Most definitely not

These seem like not relevant to the spec and might confuse people?

Until someone actually says they're confused, let's leave them alone.

What are they for apart from being historical?

They're heavily used to explain the layering of this part of the VDC ecosystem.

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Most definitely not

How are they not? If the stuff is not covered by #306, then we should amend #306 to get convergence on them.

I'm concerned about having things in the repo that are not actually used in the spec. Are these mostly just historical? What is the relationship to what is actually being specified?

Until someone actually says they're confused, let's leave them alone.

🙋‍♂️I'm confused, why I moved them. I'm pretty sure I'm "someone"... at least I hope 😅.

They're heavily used to explain the layering of this part of the VDC ecosystem.

By who? It would be great have actual links. It's confusing to have multiple models or outdated models that don't match what's in the spec.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@timcappalli timcappalli timcappalli requested changes

@mohamedamir mohamedamir mohamedamir approved these changes

Requested changes must be addressed to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@marcoscaceres @c2bo @timcappalli @mohamedamir