Re: RFC2518bis (process)

Cullen Jennings wrote:
> On 9/25/05 1:04 AM, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> Actually I was waiting that the WG comes to agreement about how we do
>> the issue tracking. It's a bit pointless to review drafts if there's no
>> process how to deal with the comments.
> 
> You are going to hate my answer on this so I apologize in advance :-)

No need to. Anything that gets us productive is good.

> The issues do need to show up in the email lists since that is the archived
> record of IETF stuff. Clearly they can also be recorded in various other
> tools - I've seen groups successfully use everything from bugzilla, blogs,
> source code control systems, word documents with revision control, text
> files, and just plain old email. The real point of these systems is to help
> the author of a document track what they need to do. Because of this, I
> believe that issues fall into two categories. 1) resolved things where the
> WG group agrees and the author just needs to update the documents 2) complex
> issues where it is not clear if the WG has reached consensus.

I absolutely agree that issues need to be reported and discussed here. 
As a matter of fact all the issues I raised *have* been reported here, 
for instance in...:

<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2004JulSep/0153.html>
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2004JulSep/0154.html>
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2004JulSep/0156.html>

The only reason why I entered them in BugZilla was that I was told to :-)

 > ...


Best regards, Julian