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

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

From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:28:26 -0700
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
CC: WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BF5D99EA.52301%fluffy@cisco.com>


I am coming in late in the game and don't want to step on too many old land
mines. As long as we have some viable plan on how to resolve and that the
issues I as chair need to drive home are clearly outlined to me on list,
then I'm good with anything.
 

On 9/26/05 12:07 PM, "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@osafoundation.org> wrote:

> 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 19:28:50 GMT

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