IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-types] Status of application/patch or text/patch?

Steve Allen <sla@ucolick.org> Thu, 19 July 2012 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <sla@ucolick.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D30421F86E0 for <ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 qicT59jJmf+Q for <ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.ucolick.org (zilan.ucolick.org [128.114.23.234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 157D021F86B6 for <ietf-types@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.ucolick.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.ucolick.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB5AE2834; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from geneva.ucolick.org (geneva.ucolick.org [128.114.23.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.ucolick.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD54B199D; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from geneva.ucolick.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by geneva.ucolick.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q6JJEpd0007234; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:14:51 -0700
Received: (from sla@localhost) by geneva.ucolick.org (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id q6JJEoHn007233; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:14:50 -0700
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:14:50 -0700
From: Steve Allen <sla@ucolick.org>
To: ietf-types@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20120719191450.GJ14844@ucolick.org>
References: <mailman.163.1342724471.22142.ietf-types@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <mailman.163.1342724471.22142.ietf-types@ietf.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Status of application/patch or text/patch?
X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" <ietf-types.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-types>, <mailto:ietf-types-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-types>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-types@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-types-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-types>, <mailto:ietf-types-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:13:59 -0000

> From: Jon Moore <jonm@jjmoore.net>
> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:24:15 -0400
> Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Status of application/patch or text/patch?

> Does anyone have opinions regarding whether this should be one or two RFCs?

RFC 4047 gives precedent for describing multiple MIME media types.

--
Steve Allen                 <sla@ucolick.org>                WGS-84 (GPS)
UCO/Lick Observatory--ISB   Natural Sciences II, Room 165    Lat  +36.99855
1156 High Street            Voice: +1 831 459 3046           Lng -122.06015
Santa Cruz, CA 95064        http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/     Hgt +250 m

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email