Subject: [imapext] qresync WG kick-off

From: Dave Cridland <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 15:29:59 -0000

As chairman.

Just so everyone's on the same page, the plan for the working group is
essentially as follows:

- Alexey's putting together starting drafts, which we'll be looking to
adopt.
- Once those drafts are out, we'll need reviewers on them to gauge
what milestones we should have - we currently just have a publication
request milestone of December; Eliot and I suspect this could be moved
much sooner if we feel that the issues are well-known.
- We're not intending meeting. This includes online meetings - all
discussion will therefore be solely on this list.

Just to refresh your memories, all discussion on this list (working-
group related or not) is covered by the Note Well; if you're unclear
what your responsibilities are under this, please ask.

Sent with [inky: <http://inky.com?kme=signature>]

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 20:35:35 +0100

> - Alexey's putting together starting drafts, which we'll be looking to 

Actually no, I think the WG should look at adopting 
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-melnikov-5162bis/

List of changes for the current version (-01) is:

Appendix A.  Changes since RFC 5162

    Addressed erratum #1365:
    http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1365

    Addressed erratum #1807:
    http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1807

    Addressed erratum #1808:
    http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1808

    Addressed erratum #1809:
    http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1809

    Addressed erratum #3322:
    http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=3322

    Fixed some examples to report data that match requirements specified

Obviously the WG (once the draft is adopted by the WG) can decide to 
address these issues differently, but for now I assume that they are 
adequately addressed.

I don't have any pending changes to -01. I do have a list of pending 
issues though, which I can post here.

> Just to refresh your memories, all discussion on this list 
> (working-group related or not) is covered by the Note Well; if you're 
> unclear what your responsibilities are under this, please ask.
>

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 20:39:50 +0100

On 09/05/2013 20:35, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>> Just so everyone's on the same page, the plan for the working group 
>> is essentially as follows:
>>
>> - Alexey's putting together starting drafts, which we'll be looking 
>> to adopt.

I will be working on a CONDSTORE draft next week. Are chairs Ok with 
accepting 1 draft at a time?