- From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 10:10:22 -0700
- To: WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
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 17:10:38 UTC