IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Michael Carter <cartermichael@gmail.com> Thu, 15 April 2010 22:58 UTC

Return-Path: <cartermichael@gmail.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 BA40C3A6A53 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:58:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 RwS0HWMNgZer for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:58:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.24]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB163A6A4A for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so654471qwb.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:58:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=kGd6b4PW29yZodul+nJUKTHBfPJie3S33LsLQMBm4jE=; b=SxHU7MFwSfTXuZXCwg/VR4dP2Sn5ShqM/CtNz4lKg7W5u5sAgsjEM75bXCkk9VG8PG tuH/prRON+9lQOV5lknBPByBaGqRUO61hNM/nGxlfl3XUpMgHA38NzifvzPMNrkvo94R 73GQ3YmiaUfkvGhl5Cey81PGdfAWkoabc18bU=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=rJy4zB9bQ0OKZ+qC+2X4YaqSXAFgyx7IQ7W6Axv4ZUzW7n00e75zkuYvi108h/8r4t uvMay+Q9uRcKmfXh73jxH1xuFJ54ulnRNWFIxVLc57CmtzM84LlwJOIz4/dr8VvKg2WM Hdga2fw+6tQEkqToHuqqagfcgEmxzUi0PnhNU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.184.84 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:58:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4BC76724.5090307@gmx.de>
References: <B578CFED7FE85644A170F4F7C9D52692019544C5@ESESSCMS0361.eemea.ericsson.se> <3d5f2a811003150230sdeb4f78hbdece96e5c742cfc@mail.gmail.com> <de17d48e1003180316w3dda1a3fo7db8b357925ec3f8@mail.gmail.com> <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>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:58:36 -0700
Received: by 10.229.91.16 with SMTP id k16mr930858qcm.40.1271372316646; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:58:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <i2y3a05072b1004151558obad8b17fpb6023d3e0d3253e6@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Carter <cartermichael@gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001636aa2c184f9d1304844e6f58"
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: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 22:58:51 -0000

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote:

> On 15.04.2010 21:10, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>> ...
>>
>> This has been the way Web Socket feedback has been handled for years
>> before this working group was created, and over the years I've had
>> multiple people tell me they prefer this model. However, I'm happy to do
>> whatever the chairs want me to do.
>> ...
>>
>
> It might have been a good thing while you used the WHATWG mailing list,
> where many many other topics are discussed as well.
>
> But *this* mailing list is for the various Hybi specs, so IMHO the right
> (and common) way to handle things is to have one mailing list thread per
> topic, and, optimally, not to mix process questions with technical questions
> ;-)
>
>
I prefer seeing all of the feedback addressed at once -- makes it easier to
follow websocket discussion and avoid hybi topics that hold no interest for
me.


-Michael Carter

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email