Subject: [xmpp] 3921bis planning

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 11:01:04 -0600

I've just posted to the list about two small issues that came up during
review of 3921bis and related specifications. My plan is to address
those issues today or tomorrow, and also closely check over the diff
between -09 and -10:

http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xmpp-3921bis-10.txt

Then I shall submit -11, which I expect will require a second WGLC
(although I leave that up to the chairs).

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 14:32:33 -0500

> (although I leave that up to the chairs).

I suspect it highly unlikely that the chairs will decide we don't need another WGLC when the author things we do need one :-)

---

From: Kevin Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:57:21 +0100

> I suspect it highly unlikely that the chairs will decide we don't need another WGLC when the author things we do need one :-)

I suspect that the author just wants to share the pain...
:)

/K

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 14:13:43 -0600

On 8/11/10 1:57 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:

> I suspect that the author just wants to share the pain... :)

s/pain/fun/

:P

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 16:17:50 -0600

> (although I leave that up to the chairs).

I've made the proposed fixes in my working copy. Because I will be
mostly offline tomorrow, I'll submit -11 now for review by the group.
Naturally, all of the changes are merely proposed and will need to be
reviewed and approved by the WG.

Your humble document editor,

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/