Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-snell-merge-patch

"Manger, James H" <> Mon, 13 May 2013 06:02 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217E821F901F for <>; Sun, 12 May 2013 23:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.699
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HELO_EQ_AU=0.377, HOST_EQ_AU=0.327, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RELAY_IS_203=0.994]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tM1dpJfasw4Q for <>; Sun, 12 May 2013 23:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B76C21F8F62 for <>; Sun, 12 May 2013 23:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.87,659,1363093200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="135236552"
Received: from unknown (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP; 13 May 2013 16:02:51 +1000
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7073"; a="131536533"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 13 May 2013 16:02:51 +1000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Mon, 13 May 2013 16:02:51 +1000
From: "Manger, James H" <>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>, IETF Apps Discuss <>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 16:02:50 +1000
Thread-Topic: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-snell-merge-patch
Thread-Index: Ac5IQpt7f4EPA5rbQ5yqijvm054g7wHW7gcQ
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-AU
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-AU
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1150D5F89CCWSMSG3153Vsrv_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-snell-merge-patch
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 06:02:59 -0000

I support progressing draft-snell-merge-patch.
The almost-established JSON working group<> would be an even better venue than here (apps-discuss) for this draft — or at least it would have been if the charter for the JSON WG didn’t add process impediments (“only after initial work is done”, “must recharter”).

James Manger

From: [] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Saturday, 4 May 2013 7:10 AM
To: IETF Apps Discuss
Subject: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-snell-merge-patch

This is a call for adoption for draft-snell-merge-patch.  The document had a thread of discussion in January, and some prior, that showed some interest within this working group, and it appears to be material that falls within our charter.  Accordingly, we'll adopt this as a working group item within the next couple of weeks unless there's objection to such processing.  I will act as document shepherd.
-MSK, APPSAWG co-chair