Re: Adjustments to our work mode - please read

["Eliot Lear (elear)" <[e-mail]>]

Ok thanks.  

And I'm really sorry I missed it.  Twice. 

I'd still ask that you keep the mailing list informed as to the status of issues and when they are coming to closure.  There are many reasons for this. One is that it should be possible for people to work with intermittent connectivity.   Another is simply that many are not accustomed to GitHub. 

Most work in groups just follow the the established process of using email as 2418 discusses and so don't need this sort of stuff.  You are going beyond what was envisioned at the time.  Fine.  But that does require extra care and you've shown that you've gone to those lengths. 

Eliot

On Oct 6, 2015, at 8:32 PM, Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> On 7 Oct 2015, at 11:07 am, Eliot Lear (elear) <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> Where at that link do you discuss the interaction with the mailing list or anything else in that message?  Please quote because I can't find it, as I wrote.
> 
> The points from my original e-mail were these:
> 
>> - Summarise (with links) the design issues closed by each draft when it is announced on this list
> 
> From [1]: "When a new draft is published, the design issues that have been closed since the last draft will be highlighted on the mailing list, to aid reviewers."
> 
>> - Allow issues to be re-opened when someone brings substantive new information (as always)
> 
> From [1]: "If substantive new information is brought to our attention, issues can be reopened by the Chair."
> 
>> - Allow those who do not wish to use the issues list to comment on this mailing list
> 
> From [1]: "Design issues require discussion and consensus in the Working Group. This discussion can happen both in the issue and on the Working Group mailing list."
> 
>> - Provide a separate, announce-only mailing list that is subscribed to every issue change, for those who do not want to use a github account to receive notifications. See: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-issues>
> 
> This is not in [1]. Do you think it should be there? I was planning on adding it elsewhere on the site.
> 
> So what exactly can't you find -- are you looking for something else that isn't above, or did you just fail to find the link even though I gave the title, or...? Please be as precise as you can, as I'm getting frustrated pointing out the same information to you repeatedly, and I don't *think* you're enjoying this either.
> 
> I have no doubt that [1] can be improved -- indeed, after some offline discussion with Ted, there are a number of ways I think we can make it a more friendly and complete document -- especially around how decisions are made (which is more about reminding people how consensus works in the IETF and relating that to the work mode). However, most WGs don't have any such document, so I'm finding it a bit ironic to hear you rail about "transparency."
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> [1] https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Eliot
>> 
>>> On Oct 6, 2015, at 8:02 PM, Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 6 Oct 2015, at 11:05 pm, Eliot Lear (elear) <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Honestly if you put up that process on your GitHub home page I'd be satisfied (if it's there I can't find it).  Better to make clear through IETF mechanisms that people from other WGs are used to.
>>> 
>>> I explained that in the e-mail that you're responding to:
>>> 
>>> """
>>> It is documented, on our WG home page - <https://httpwg.github.io/>, currently linked as "How to Contribute - start here" (as well as from the navigation bar from every page on that site). We regularly show the home page link at our meetings, it's easily found by any search engine, and it's linked from our charter.
>>> """
>>> 
>>> If you have suggestions on how to improve the link's visibility, they're welcome.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>