- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:07:35 -0700
- To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
- Cc: WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
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 19:10:54 UTC