Changes between Version 78 and Version 79 of WikiStart
- Timestamp:
- 08/02/13 02:52:18 (9 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
WikiStart
v78 v79 35 35 Related material includes: 36 36 37 * [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/browser Subversion repository] 37 * [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/browser Subversion repository for the HTTP/1.1 specs] 38 * [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/9 Active Design Tickets] 39 * [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/10 Active Editorial Tickets] 40 * [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/15 Tickets Waiting to be Verified] 41 * [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/20 WGLC Tickets] 38 42 * [http://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/httpbis/draft-ietf-httpbis/diffs/ Document changes], also in [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/timeline?ticket=on&changeset=on&milestone=on&max=50&daysback=90&format=rss RSS] and on [http://twitter.com/httpbis Twitter] 43 44 New issues on them can be raised by sending e-mail to the list (see below). It helps to call attention to them in the Subject line (e.g., "NEW ISSUE: ..."). 39 45 40 46 Currently, the group doesn't officially work on new HTTP features, as that's outside the scope of [http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/httpbis-charter.html our charter]. However, they are often discussed informally on our list, because there are a large number of interested HTTP implementers, and because we may take on new work with a recharter in the future. We track these as PotentialWork. 47 41 48 42 49 … … 47 54 The basis of the work is [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mbelshe-httpbis-spdy-00 SPDY]. However, we will be collecting issues against this document, as well as confirming consensus over individual portions. 48 55 49 See also [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/21 Tickets related to HTTP/2.0]. 56 Related material includes: 57 58 * [https://github.com/http2/http2-spec Git repository for the HTTP/2.0 spec] 59 * [https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues?state=open Open Tickets] 60 * [https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/commits/master Document changes], also in [https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/commits/master.atom Atom] and on [http://twitter.com/httpbis Twitter] 61 62 See the Git repository's README for details of how to provide input to HTTP/2.0. 63 50 64 51 65 == Issue Handling == 52 66 53 Issues with the specifications are kept in our [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report ticket tracker].67 For all deliverables, we have two basic types of issues; "design" and "editorial". 54 68 55 We have two basic types of issues; Design ([http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/9 open issues]) and Editorial ([http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/10 open issues]). 56 57 Design issues need to be discussed by the Working Group to reach consensus. This generally happens on the mailing list when the issue is raised, but the editors sometimes incorporate a proposed resolution to a design issue in a draft, so that the WG can see it in-situ. Such tickets aren't fully closed until the group confirms the proposal after it is published; you can see [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/15 a list of such tickets here]. 69 Design issues need to be discussed by the Working Group to reach consensus. This generally happens on the mailing list when the issue is raised, but the editors sometimes incorporate a proposed resolution to a design issue in a draft, so that the WG can see it in-situ. Such tickets aren't fully closed until the group confirms the proposal after it is published. 58 70 59 71 Editorial issues can be resolved by the editors without consultation with the group, although sometimes an editor will poll the group for advice. 60 72 61 New issues can be raised by sending e-mail to the list (see below). It helps to call attention to them in the Subject line (e.g., "NEW ISSUE: ...").62 73 63 Finally, for those documents in Working Group Last Call, we have a summary of [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/20 WGLC issues].64 65 [[TicketStats( height=250,daterange=36m,res_days=30)]]66 74 67 75 == Participate == … … 69 77 As with all IETF Working Groups, almost all discussion and decisions are made on our [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/ mailing list]. Joining this list is "joining" the Working Group, and is the best way to participate. 70 78 71 We meet at least twice a year at [http://www.ietf.org/meeting/ IETF meetings]; see also 79 We meet at least twice a year at [http://www.ietf.org/meeting/ IETF meetings]; see also [http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/browser/wg_materials materials from past meetings]. 72 80 73 81 During our official meetings, we use an XMPP (Jabber) channel at xmpp://httpbis@jabber.ietf.org?join ([http://jabber.ietf.org/logs/httpbis/ archives]) provided by the IETF. … … 86 94 * [http://www.kingsmountain.com/people/Jeff.Hodges/ Jeff Hodges] - Editor, Security Properties 87 95 * [http://internetmessagingtechnology.org/ Barry Leiba] - our current Area Director, who oversees the WG for the [http://www.iesg.org/ IESG] 96 * [https://plus.google.com/103486446098148130828/posts Martin Thomson] - Editor, HTTP/2.0 97 * [http://www.melnikov.ca/ Alexey Melnikov] - Editor, HTTP/2.0; former Area Director 88 98 89 99