W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: RFC2518bis (process)

From: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 22:09:47 -0400
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF441F9CC1.03DCC582-ON85257087.000BD066-85257087.000BE1BB@us.ibm.com>
It sounds like we need another co-author to replace Jason.

Cheers,
Geoff

Lisa wrote on 09/24/2005 04:59:20 PM:

> 
> Sure, no problem.
> 
>   - I last published RFC2518bis a couple months ago: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/idindex.cgi? 
> command=id_detail&id=8360.  I don't recall seeing any comments.
> 
>   - I don't think Jason Crawford has the time to contribute any more :(  

> So no more RFC2518bis co-author or issue tracking.
> 
>   - I've been hunting around for interoperability documentation -- 
> because we did do two interop tests -- but we don't seem to have that 
> available now (perhaps it was not intended to be public outside the 
> interops anyway).  We never did get somebody to volunteer to collect 
> interop data or format that for the IESG 
> (http://www.ietf.org/IESG/Implementations/).
> 
> What are other peoples' thoughts about how to do this now?
> 
> Lisa
> 
> On Sep 23, 2005, at 11:36 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> 
> >
> > Elias Sinderson wrote:
> >> Julian Reschke wrote:
> >>> [...] So can we please consider the union of 
> >>> <http://www.webdav.org/wg/rfcdev/issues.htm> and 
> >>> <http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?product=WebDAV- 
> >>> RFC2518-bis> as current issues list?
> >> I would think this to be a reasonable starting point for the upcoming 
 
> >> efforts.
> >> Re: Bugzilla, are we intending to continue tracking issues on the 
> >> bugzilla installation? I would be in favor of this for a number of 
> >> reasons that I'll skip over here. (I'll happily enumerate them if 
> >> asked, but one should think they them to be rather self-evident and 
> >> well understood.) Assuming all are in favor of this approach, someone 
 
> >> will need to take on the task of importing the issues listed on the 
> >> webdav.org site into bugzilla. . .
> >> For historical and other reasons it would be desireable to import all 
 
> >> of the issues listed, although a certain amount of pragmatism would 
> >> dictate that closed issues could be safely omitted. At the very 
> >> least, an email should be sent to the mailing list with a summary of 
> >> the already closed issues as detailed within the webdav.org list.
> >> Following the import into bugzilla, it would seem straightforward to 
> >> go through them one-by-one in seperate threads.
> >
> >
> > Lisa, Cullen,
> >
> > it would be nice if you could provide some feedback about what's going 
 
> > on. Are there any plans to actually get the work finished, should we 
> > the working group give up, or are new volunteers for authoring the 
> > spec needed?
> >
> > Best regards, Julian
> >
> 
> 
Received on Sunday, 25 September 2005 02:10:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:09 GMT