56 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
56 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
---
|
|
summary: How to do related events, e.g. feedback, updates work protocol wise?
|
|
---
|
|
assignee: erikj
|
|
created: 2014-09-16 12:41:08.0
|
|
creator: erikj
|
|
description: ''
|
|
id: '10201'
|
|
key: SPEC-9
|
|
number: '9'
|
|
priority: '2'
|
|
project: '10001'
|
|
reporter: erikj
|
|
resolution: '3'
|
|
resolutiondate: 2016-06-16 11:42:09.0
|
|
status: '5'
|
|
type: '2'
|
|
updated: 2016-06-16 11:42:09.0
|
|
votes: '0'
|
|
watches: '2'
|
|
workflowId: '10329'
|
|
---
|
|
actions:
|
|
- author: erikj
|
|
body: We need to think about how deletions interact with state updates (including membership events) and the Pdu graphs.
|
|
created: 2014-09-19 17:15:36.0
|
|
id: '10346'
|
|
issue: '10201'
|
|
type: comment
|
|
updateauthor: erikj
|
|
updated: 2014-09-19 17:15:36.0
|
|
- author: richvdh
|
|
body: '[~erikj]: given we have (specced) redactions, is this now a duplicate of SPEC-410?'
|
|
created: 2016-06-16 11:28:20.0
|
|
id: '13003'
|
|
issue: '10201'
|
|
type: comment
|
|
updateauthor: richvdh
|
|
updated: 2016-06-16 11:28:20.0
|
|
- author: erikj
|
|
body: Yeah, probably
|
|
created: 2016-06-16 11:31:32.0
|
|
id: '13005'
|
|
issue: '10201'
|
|
type: comment
|
|
updateauthor: erikj
|
|
updated: 2016-06-16 11:31:32.0
|
|
- author: richvdh
|
|
body: sweet
|
|
created: 2016-06-16 11:42:09.0
|
|
id: '13007'
|
|
issue: '10201'
|
|
type: comment
|
|
updateauthor: richvdh
|
|
updated: 2016-06-16 11:42:09.0
|