Re: what's up with commenting on http/2 github issues

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Wed, 24 April 2013 06:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584A721F8E66 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 23:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UTuGgRjECPGs for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 23:20:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9952121F8E49 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 23:20:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UUt37-0006nD-HM for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 06:19:25 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 06:19:25 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UUt37-0006nD-HM@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1UUt32-0006mJ-Ex for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 06:19:20 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1UUt31-0003Bm-ES for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 06:19:20 +0000
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.20]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Me6KG-1U9LkZ09c6-00PtWG for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:18:53 +0200
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 24 Apr 2013 06:18:52 -0000
Received: from p54BB32E4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [84.187.50.228] by mail.gmx.net (mp020) with SMTP; 24 Apr 2013 08:18:52 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+ss7s5m7qsN+Uq+hg7VNO1sM+vvoJMDNpyvURT1D g4c06sC6AWNHXr
Message-ID: <51777949.2000501@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:18:49 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
CC: =?UTF-8?B?IldpbGxpYW0gQ2hhbiAo6ZmI5pm65piMKSI=?= <willchan@chromium.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <CAA4WUYj3VY+50Wt2RP-WGv=xcUjBPDmcdfwWuig-CweSW1Nk1w@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbczaxA405=PzRVRaSNHZQwbp3h_5=tHojzK7xoqqmDsGQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABP7RbczaxA405=PzRVRaSNHZQwbp3h_5=tHojzK7xoqqmDsGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.18; envelope-from=julian.reschke@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UUt31-0003Bm-ES af002068bbff378dd1bbe735ec281435
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: what's up with commenting on http/2 github issues
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/51777949.2000501@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17523
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On 2013-04-24 07:29, James M Snell wrote:
> I'm rather wondering the same thing. I've chimed in a bit over there
> but would much rather have the discussion here; however, I'm also

We talked about this during the last WG meeting; IMHO any discussion 
that leads to protocol changes (beyond editorial) needs to happen here.

> concerned about flooding the list with too much traffic. In the past
> few days I've seen a ton of notes post from Mark about a broad variety
> of issues (editorial and otherwise) that I'm simply not sure how to
> respond to effectively.
> ...

Indeed, but that's because Mark does what we all should be doing - doing 
WGLC reviews. We'll just need to handle the back log carefully and see 
that we finish 1.1 as soon as possible.

Best regards, Julian