IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] email granularity, was: WebSockets feedback

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Fri, 16 April 2010 16:18 UTC

Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9E7B3A6C3A for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.047
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.047 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.929, BAYES_20=-0.74, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JJE+mFmieqpT for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:18:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f189.google.com (mail-iw0-f189.google.com [209.85.223.189]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B56543A6B90 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn27 with SMTP id 27so1494466iwn.5 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:14:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.17.135 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:14:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [216.113.204.139]
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20100416011832.095e31e8@resistor.net>
References: <B578CFED7FE85644A170F4F7C9D52692019544C5@ESESSCMS0361.eemea.ericsson.se> <p2o3d5f2a811003310031x5dce7e9cs86a5a8981cd23c1d@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1004140032040.875@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <w2y5821ea241004142323h949c0b07l771171500a625a6c@mail.gmail.com> <4BC6DD89.4060502@gmx.de> <r2x5821ea241004150244ud3cb79bt757049890bf3d9ab@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1004151908320.23507@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <4BC76724.5090307@gmx.de> <4BC8105F.5000006@webtide.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20100416011832.095e31e8@resistor.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:14:16 -0700
Received: by 10.231.170.204 with SMTP id e12mr630168ibz.75.1271434456966; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:14:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <z2t8963eb921004160914w1ec4c7ebqdc4c585c346a0797@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: SM <sm@resistor.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] email granularity, was: WebSockets feedback
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:18:22 -0000

I don't know about you, but I'm extremely busy, and one of my main
tools for dealing with the email torrent is triage.  In a typical IETF
WG, there are some issues under discussion where I feel I have
contributions to make and others where I'm happy to leave the
resolution to others.  This allows me to delete a substantial amount
of email unread and thus focus my contributions.  Ian's massive batch
updates defeat this strategy and decrease the likelihood that I'll be
able to participate meaningfully.  -T

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 1:38 AM, SM <sm@resistor.net> wrote:
> At 00:23 16-04-10, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>>
>> As this thread is turning into a bit of vote,
>> I'll state my preference for a mostly threaded
>> model.
>
> The important point is that Ian has been responding to feedback.  How the
> author does that is a matter of style.
>
>> However, some level of aggregation is OK, but what I didn't like
>> about the last mega-feedback post was three fold:
>>
>>  + it mixed significantly different topics, such as
>>   editing style for drafts, discussion of requirements
>>   and discussions of new features.
>
> Yes.  That makes it difficult to identify where issues were discussed and
> how they were resolved.
>
>>  + How does one respond to such a mega post if you
>>   don't agree with it?   Aggregation is fine for
>
> It is a matter of personal preference.
>
> At 00:41 16-04-10, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> My experience is that abusing a issue tracker for *discussion* is a
>> terrible thing. (Been there in several WGs, and it didn't work well)
>
> Yes.
>
> Regards,
> -sm
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email