Sdkv47 ics

[faddat]

Description

Draft PR for comparison and collection of opinions

Note: please don't treat this as a regular PR. This is for comparison.

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• included the correct type prefix in the PR title
• added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
• provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
• followed the guidelines for building modules
• included the necessary unit and integration tests
• added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
• included comments for documenting Go code
• updated the relevant documentation or specification
• reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
• confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic
• reviewed API design and naming
• reviewed documentation is accurate
• reviewed tests and test coverage
• manually tested (if applicable)

[tac0turtle]

ics changes are already on main and 0.47, no need for this. You can open this pro in your fork if needed

[faddat]

@tac0turtle can you please re-check?

I think that the latest status of this is that Informal now recognizes that changes are needed. We'll need to discuss more.

[faddat]

@tac0turtle - it seems that Informalinc thinks that these changes will be needed, too. Can you please advise how to proceed?

[tac0turtle]

it would be good to get an explanation about this change and why they require it.

[faddat]

We have been asking in slack, on GitHub, and in many other places. Please keep in mind that it is not just the informal team that needs this, it is the hub that needs this. When we made this pull request, we were being told by informal that this work was not needed.

[mergify]

⚠️ The sha of the head commit of this PR conflicts with #15940. Mergify cannot evaluate rules on this PR. ⚠️