- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 14:59:28 +1100
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Patrick McManus <patrick.ducksong@gmail.com>
Everyone, When we set up our most recent work mode at <https://github.com/httpwg/http-core/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md>, it was heavily influenced by the just-concluded work on HTTP/2. In particular, we had been in a habit of using the `design` label to explicitly denote issues requiring Working Group consensus, and `editorial` for those that did not. However, in practice we've stopped using design, both on the extensions and the core repo. So, to simplify things and reflect how we actually work, I've adjusted both repos' CONTRIBUTING.md to reflect this; now, any issue that isn't labeled as `editorial` is implicitly a design issue. Likewise, we'd previously documented a fairly onerous process for denoting which issues achieved working group consensus, using the `has-consensus` label. In practice, we judge consensus on a document continuously during its lifetime, especially towards the end, and haven't been using that label. So, I've also adjusted the documentation for `has-consensus`; now, it only reflects when we've done an explicit consensus call (e.g., for a contentious issue), to remind us of that. Please have a read over CONTRIBUTING.md and flag any concerns as they arise. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 29 October 2018 03:59:52 UTC