W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: Interim meeting around London?

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 11:29:41 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNceRwrvHeWsi0i-7MVFzwy4_bZr5U8L-VXKChDFsFJAhQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
Cc: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Things inevitably come up after the regular course of IETF meetings, and
being able to discuss them right away is useful.
I wouldn't mind a single day, immediately after the regular week's
meetings, but anything more than that seems like a waste of time.

-=R


On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:54 AM, William Chan (陈智昌)
<willchan@chromium.org>wrote:

> I like Patrick's point. My inclination is that if we need time to
> discuss actual stuff, we should schedule (c). But for interop reasons,
> a short (do we even need a full day?) meeting around London might be
> good.
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 4:40 AM, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
> wrote:
> > I'm in favor of a short meeting simply because our cadence of interims
> and
> > their implicit deadlines was worked well - it has provided incentives to
> > keep the development efforts moving. As evidence I can cite 5 requests in
> > the last few days for updated firefox draft -09 builds for folks to test
> > with. That's great - its working. keep going. regular ietf weeks don't
> > provide the same incentive.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everybody,
> >>
> >> We’ve previously talked about the possibility of another interim meeting
> >> piggybacking upon IETF London, much as we did for Berlin/Hamburg.
> >>
> >> Since there are only about four weeks between our Zurich interim and
> >> London, and we haven’t had our Zurich meeting yet, it’s not clear how
> useful
> >> that meeting would be.
> >>
> >> One the one hand, we’re trying to finish the “core” specification soon,
> >> and it would be good to keep velocity up and close any lingering issues
> >> around the spec. On the other, the small gap between meetings means that
> >> it’s unlikely we’ll have big spec or implementation updates to
> >> discuss/interop.
> >>
> >> Ideally, we’d decide *after* Zurich, but that would make the travel and
> >> meeting planning cycle really tight.
> >>
> >> I think the options are roughly:
> >>
> >> a) Feb 26-28 or 27-28 in London (avoiding overlap with the STRINT
> workshop
> >> as necessary)
> >> b) Mar 8 in London (one-day Saturday meeting to clean up any dangling
> >> issues)
> >> c) Wait until April or June, if necessary, location TBD
> >>
> >> If we did (b), I’d request that the HTTPbis meeting during IETF be late
> in
> >> the week, to make people’s travel a bit more convenient.
> >>
> >> I’d be interested to hear what people think. Note that this is not a
> vote
> >> :)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2014 19:30:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:23 UTC