Re: RFC2518bis (process)

Elias Sinderson 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-bis> 
>> 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.


Lisa, Cullen,

it would be nice if you could provide some feedback about what's going 
on. Are there any plans to actually get the work finished, should we the 
working group give up, or are new volunteers for authoring the spec needed?

Best regards, Julian

Received on Friday, 23 September 2005 18:36:15 UTC