Skip to content

MSC4480 Sliding Sync Extension: Sticky Events#4480

Open
Johennes wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
johannes/sticky-events-sss-extension
Open

MSC4480 Sliding Sync Extension: Sticky Events#4480
Johennes wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
johannes/sticky-events-sss-extension

Conversation

@Johennes

@Johennes Johennes commented May 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Johennes Johennes changed the title MSCXXXX: Sliding Sync Extension: Sticky Events MSC4480 Sliding Sync Extension: Sticky Events May 20, 2026
@Johennes Johennes force-pushed the johannes/sticky-events-sss-extension branch from 1a8a473 to ccadd23 Compare May 20, 2026 13:49
Signed-off-by: Johannes Marbach <n0-0ne+github@mailbox.org>
@Johennes Johennes force-pushed the johannes/sticky-events-sss-extension branch from ccadd23 to c7337f8 Compare May 20, 2026 13:51
@Johennes Johennes marked this pull request as ready for review May 20, 2026 13:51
@Johennes Johennes mentioned this pull request May 20, 2026
4 tasks

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@reivilibre said:

  • History visibility checks MUST NOT be applied to sticky events. Any joined user is authorised to see sticky events for the duration they remain sticky.

I think sticky events in this situation will never come down the timeline section of sliding sync, but I need to confirm that. In the Synapse implementation it looks like Sliding Sync only shows events since you joined the room.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this to Tracking for review in Spec Core Team Workflow May 20, 2026
@turt2live turt2live added proposal A matrix spec change proposal. Process state. A-Client Server Client-Server API kind:core MSC which is critical to the protocol's success needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. matrix-2.0 Required for Matrix 2.0 (note: do not rename - used in reports/links) labels May 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Implementation requirements:

  • Server
  • Client (using)

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

Labels

A-Client Server Client-Server API A-VOIP kind:core MSC which is critical to the protocol's success matrix-2.0 Required for Matrix 2.0 (note: do not rename - used in reports/links) 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. Process state.

Projects

Status: Tracking for review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants