Re: Where to discuss TR process issues? [Was: Re: [eventsource] Is Server-Sent Events ready for LC? ; deadline July 1

2011-07-09 Thread Charles McCathieNevile
On Wed, 06 Jul 2011 23:50:48 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: On Wed, 6 Jul 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote: So, rather than continuing to complain about this process on public-webapps, I would appreciate it if you would please move TR process type discussions to another Public list. I'm

Where to discuss TR process issues? [Was: Re: [eventsource] Is Server-Sent Events ready for LC? ; deadline July 1

2011-07-06 Thread Arthur Barstow
Hi Hixie, On 7/6/11 1:55 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote: On Tue, 5 Jul 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote: Any comments re the priority of this bug, in particular if it must be addressed before publishing a new LCWD? Can we please stop letting the LCWD/CR/PR process nonsense drive the prioritisation of

Re: Where to discuss TR process issues? [Was: Re: [eventsource] Is Server-Sent Events ready for LC? ; deadline July 1

2011-07-06 Thread Ian Hickson
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote: So, rather than continuing to complain about this process on public-webapps, I would appreciate it if you would please move TR process type discussions to another Public list. I'm not asking to have a discussion about it at all; I'm asking that you

Re: Where to discuss TR process issues? [Was: Re: [eventsource] Is Server-Sent Events ready for LC? ; deadline July 1

2011-07-06 Thread Ian Jacobs
On 6 Jul 2011, at 2:41 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Hi Hixie, On 7/6/11 1:55 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote: On Tue, 5 Jul 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote: Any comments re the priority of this bug, in particular if it must be addressed before publishing a new LCWD? Can we please stop letting the