Re: [nfsv4] draft-haynes-nfsv4-versioning-01

[Tom Haynes <[e-mail]>]

On Oct 23, 2014, at 9:38 AM, David Noveck <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > So this looks good to go with only two open items for me:
> 
> I assume that by "good to go", you mean "ready to convert to a working group document”.

Sure

> 
> While I think it is desirable to reduce the number of points of disagreement, I want us to be clear that having no unresolved points of disagreement is not a requirement for making a document into a working group document. 

Agreed and I was trying to suggest that with “open” and not saying “must be resolved”.


> That's a more appropriate standard for going into (and exiting) WGLC.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, for this to become a working group document, we need rough consensus on two points:
> Does the working group think a document describing versioning across all of NFSv4 a desirable thing to do?
> is the current draft a reasonable vehicle to do that?  In other words, people can still think we got some things wrong, as long as they don't think we got things so wrong that we need to start again from scratch.
> 
> I haven't heard any disagreement on these points so far, but we might.  If there is a consensus, we should take note of it, and move the document forward.
> 
> As far as the two open items you mentioned, I'll respond to each item separately.  We don't want to combine these threads into a tangled mess.
> 
> 
>