feat(spec): Add last update time to `Task` by lkawka · Pull Request #1206 · a2aproject/A2A

lkawka · 2025-11-17T15:47:13Z

The new task/list method's specification dictates that tasks must be ordered by the last update time. However, the current data model lacks a direct way to determine when a task was last updated. To resolve this, a new field with last update time is being added to the Task message.

Addressing potential concerns:

The timestamp field in the TaskStatus message already exists: There are two issues with this field:
1. Not all task updates are necessarily status updates.
2. The field is optional, which can lead to unstable ordering when sorting by this field alone.
Backends can just incorporate this information into their internal data models: While true, including this in the public API offers significant advantages by allowing clients to readily access and display this value to users.

Fixes #1207

gemini-code-assist · 2025-11-17T15:47:27Z

Summary of Changes

Hello @lkawka, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the Task data model by introducing a new update_time field. This addition is essential to fulfill the task/list method's requirement for ordering tasks by their last update, providing a dedicated and reliable timestamp for all task modifications, distinct from just status changes. The change is propagated across the gRPC protobuf definition, the JSON schema, and the TypeScript type definitions to ensure consistency and client accessibility.

Highlights

Task Message Update: Introduced an update_time field to the Task message in a2a.proto to track the last modification time, crucial for ordering tasks.
JSON Schema and TypeScript Updates: The updateTime field was added to the Task definition in a2a.json (as a required ISO 8601 string) and to the Task interface in types.ts to ensure consistency across all definitions.
Minor Formatting Adjustment: A small formatting change was applied to the ListTaskPushNotificationConfigParams interface in types/src/types.ts.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	`/gemini review`	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	`/gemini summary`	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	`/gemini help`	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This pull request introduces an update_time field to the Task message across the Protobuf, JSON, and TypeScript specifications. This change is well-justified by the need to order tasks by their last update time. The implementation is consistent and correct across all modified files. I have one minor suggestion to revert a purely stylistic change to keep the pull request focused on its primary goal. Otherwise, the changes look good.

types/src/types.ts

Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

darrelmiller · 2025-12-01T19:22:20Z

/vote

git-vote · 2025-12-01T19:22:22Z

DEPRECATED
#1206 (comment) is the real vote

Vote created

@darrelmiller has called for a vote on feat: Add last update time to Task`` (#1206).

The members of the following teams have binding votes:

Team
@a2aproject/a2a-tsc

Non-binding votes are also appreciated as a sign of support!

How to vote

You can cast your vote by reacting to this comment. The following reactions are supported:

In favor	Against	Abstain
👍	👎	👀

Please note that voting for multiple options is not allowed and those votes won't be counted.

The vote will be open for 7days. It will pass if at least 51% of the users with binding votes vote In favor 👍. Once it's closed, results will be published here as a new comment.

git-vote · 2025-12-02T19:27:58Z

Vote status

So far 12.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
1	0	0	7

Binding votes (1)

User	Vote	Timestamp
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-02 17:59:29.0 +00:00:00
@muscariello	Pending
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@ToddSegal	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2025-12-03T19:29:30Z

Vote status

So far 12.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
1	0	0	7

Binding votes (1)

User	Vote	Timestamp
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-02 17:59:29.0 +00:00:00
@muscariello	Pending
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@ToddSegal	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

Clarified the format of the last_updated timestamp.

git-vote · 2025-12-04T19:57:58Z

Vote status

So far 25.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
2	0	0	6

Binding votes (2)

User	Vote	Timestamp
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-02 17:59:29.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-04 7:59:35.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@ToddSegal	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2025-12-05T19:59:30Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-04 21:06:55.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-02 17:59:29.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-04 7:59:35.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2025-12-06T20:27:58Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-04 21:06:55.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-02 17:59:29.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-04 7:59:35.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2025-12-07T20:29:31Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-04 21:06:55.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-02 17:59:29.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-04 7:59:35.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2025-12-08T19:22:27Z

Vote closed

The vote did not pass.

37.50% of the users with binding vote were in favor and 0.00% were against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
@ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-04 21:06:55.0 +00:00:00
@geneknit	In favor	2025-12-02 17:59:29.0 +00:00:00
@muscariello	In favor	2025-12-04 7:59:35.0 +00:00:00

amye · 2025-12-09T17:32:02Z

/vote

git-vote · 2025-12-28T22:10:34Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2025-12-29T22:19:52Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2025-12-30T22:40:34Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2025-12-31T22:49:52Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-01T23:10:35Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-02T23:19:53Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-03T23:40:35Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-04T23:49:53Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-06T00:10:35Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

Tehsmash · 2026-01-06T17:54:37Z

After discussion in the TSC meeting on 2026/01/6, we agreed to leave the fields in Task as they are and change the filter for ListTasks to status_timestamp_after to indicate that its based on the task status only.

git-vote · 2026-01-07T00:19:53Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-08T00:40:36Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-09T00:49:54Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-10T01:10:36Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-11T01:19:54Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-12T01:40:37Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

git-vote · 2026-01-13T01:49:54Z

Vote status

So far 37.50% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
3	0	0	5

Binding votes (3)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@lerhaupt	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending

darrelmiller · 2026-01-13T16:28:55Z

@Tehsmash I think that means we could close this PR and combine the proposed naming change with this PR to change the datatype #1288

Tehsmash · 2026-01-13T17:05:13Z

@Tehsmash I think that means we could close this PR and combine the proposed naming change with this PR to change the datatype #1288

👍 happy for it to be combined (whatever makes it turn around faster)

Tasks do not have a top level last_updated time this clarifies the spec and a2a.proto so that the filter and ordering refers to the status.timestamp instead. Closes: a2aproject#1206

darrelmiller · 2026-01-13T21:26:33Z

Closing this PR in favour of #1358

git-vote · 2026-01-14T02:10:37Z

Vote status

So far 44.44% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 51%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
4	0	0	5

Binding votes (4)

User	Vote	Timestamp
ToddSegal	In favor	2025-12-12 1:50:07.0 +00:00:00
geneknit	In favor	2025-12-19 18:54:08.0 +00:00:00
lerhaupt	In favor	2026-01-13 21:53:09.0 +00:00:00
muscariello	In favor	2025-12-11 9:42:01.0 +00:00:00
@darrelmiller	Pending
@hughesthe1st	Pending
@000-000-000-000-000	Pending
@SivaNSAP	Pending
@spetschulatSFDC	Pending

This PR combines two fixes for the ListTaskRequest last_updated_after field one changes the field to a timestamp type and one renames it and clarifies the ordering of the task list result. Original PR for the timestamp type fix was: #1288 Fixes: #1287 Fixes: #1206 --------- Co-authored-by: Yaroslav Shevchuk <yarolegovich@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Darrel <darrmi@microsoft.com>

amye · 2026-01-14T16:42:46Z

/cancel-vote

#1358 has the correct one + gitvote has added Stephen already, so yay! We'll restart this.

git-vote · 2026-01-14T16:42:48Z

Vote cancelled

@amye has cancelled the vote in progress in this pull request.

feat: Add updateTime to Task

aee9435

lkawka requested a review from a team as a code owner November 17, 2025 15:47

gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Nov 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

types/src/types.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lkawka and others added 3 commits November 17, 2025 16:53

Apply suggestion from @gemini-code-assist[bot]

f08d47a

Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into task-update-time

c24ca48

rename updateTime to lastUpdated

03030be

lkawka changed the title ~~feat: Add update_time to Task~~ feat: Add last update time to Task Nov 21, 2025

Merge branch 'main' into task-update-time

4638f09

git-vote bot added gitvote gitvote/open labels Dec 1, 2025

amye added this to TSC Review Dec 2, 2025

amye moved this to In Voting in TSC Review Dec 2, 2025

muscariello added the TSC Review To be reviewed by the Technical Steering Committee label Dec 4, 2025

lkawka added 2 commits December 4, 2025 09:53

Merge branch 'main' into task-update-time

cfa093c

Update last_updated field comment for clarity

aaddfe5

Clarified the format of the last_updated timestamp.

holtskinner changed the title ~~feat: Add last update time to Task~~ feat(spec): Add last update time to Task Dec 5, 2025

git-vote bot added gitvote/closed gitvote/failed and removed gitvote/open labels Dec 8, 2025

darrelmiller assigned Tehsmash Jan 13, 2026

Tehsmash mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2026

fix(spec)!: Fixes for the last_updated_after field #1358

Merged

darrelmiller closed this Jan 13, 2026

github-project-automation bot moved this from In Voting to Done in TSC Review Jan 13, 2026

git-vote bot removed the gitvote/open label Jan 14, 2026

Conversation

lkawka commented Nov 17, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot commented Nov 17, 2025

Summary of Changes

Highlights

Footnotes

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

darrelmiller commented Dec 1, 2025

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 1, 2025 • edited by amye Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Vote created

How to vote

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 2, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (1)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 3, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (1)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 4, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (2)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 5, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (3)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 6, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (3)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 7, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (3)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 8, 2025

Vote closed

Summary

Binding votes (3)

Uh oh!

amye commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 28, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (3)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 29, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (3)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 30, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (3)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Dec 31, 2025

Vote status

Summary

Binding votes (3)

Uh oh!

git-vote bot commented Jan 1, 2026

Vote status

lkawka commented Nov 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

git-vote bot commented Dec 1, 2025 •

edited by amye

Loading