> I am not a fan of generic replaceable events/atags and am fighting against implementing that for as long as possible
Are you fighting against replaceables in general or just with the idea of deleting past versions of them? Would you be ok if past versions were kept in the database but not indexed? Or is there something else that bugs you?
i would prefer versioned events with pruning. I don’t like the concept of replaceable events or information destruction as a core protocol feature.
That makes sense. But the text does not require events to be deleted. It says:
> for kind n such that 10000 <= n < 20000 || n == 0 || n == 3, events are replaceable, which means that, for each combination of pubkey and kind, only the latest event MUST be stored by relays, older versions MAY be discarded.
Which basically says that both pruning and deletion are acceptable implementations. Do you think the text should push more clearly for pruning?
We could change to this:
> for kind n such that 10000 <= n < 20000 || n == 0 || n == 3, events are replaceable, which means that, for each combination of pubkey and kind, the latest event MUST be stored and previous versions SHOULD be stored. Past versions MAY be pruned.
Basically the same thing, but adding a preference for pruning.
