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

Re: RFC2518bis - tracking the things we agree on...

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:07:35 -0700
Message-Id: <476ae4e91c97ad1cc414c3124a044b4d@osafoundation.org>
Cc: WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>

I can't edit issues.htm.  I can move it to  
http://ietf.webdav.org/webdav and edit it from there, which I think I  
would prefer.  That is, if people want the main editor to be the same  
person to track issues.  I find it to be useful to have the person who  
tracks issues not to be the person who proposes to close them -- the  
same principle behind which in many development teams, the developer  
who resolves the bug "fixed" is not allowed to resolve the bug  
"verified".

Note that I've tracked a bunch of issues separately in a Word document.  
  This is a big document because it tracks not only every change made to  
RFC2518 but also why -- it was intended to link issues together with  
what changes were made in an attempt to resolve the issue.
http://ietf.webdav.org/webdav/rfc2518bis/RFC2518%20Changes.doc

If people are OK with me tracking issues, then I propose to move the  
issues table to the same location and edit it myself.

lisa

On Sep 26, 2005, at 10:10 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:

>
>
> Lisa, can you weigh in on how you want to track the issues that we have
> clear consensus on. If you want to use both
>>> <http://www.webdav.org/wg/rfcdev/issues.htm> and
>>> <http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?product=WebDAV- 
>>> RFC2518-bi
> I can cope with that, thought it seems like having one would be better  
> than
> two.
>
>
>
> On 8/23/05 1:52 PM, "Elias Sinderson" <elias@cse.ucsc.edu> 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-bi
>>> s>
>>> 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.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Elias
>
Received on Monday, 26 September 2005 19:10:54 GMT

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