-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 11:31 PM, Alexander Tsvyashchenko wrote: > Hello Peter, > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:46:18 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> That's a lot of changes. Can we allow the changes in 1.1 to settle for a >> while before we make further edits? Are the modifications you propose >> spec errata, protocol optimizations, niceties instead of necessities, >> solutions to security problems, etc.? > > I believe that "a" (server push in "itemremove") is spec errata, "d" (end > points in range commands) might be spec text clarification (not sure where > it belongs in your list ;-), while all other changes are more like > "protocol/usage case optimizations". > > You (or smb else) might want to disagree with my classification, though > (in fact, even with the whole idea of these changes being necessary) - to > hear others opinions on the issues mentioned is why I put it on the list in > the first place: maybe nobody else sees these issues as issues at all ...
Well, see, the Council has already approved version 1.1 of the spec (other than Ralph, who has until the end of the day to vote). So if we make more changes, the Council will need to issue a second Last Call and then the new Council will approve the changes, which means we'll need to wait at least a month. I'd rather push out 1.1 because it has good fixes, then complete further revisions that will be published in 1.2. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkrDlYAACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzoSACdGnz9kEObfvYSxUOy2b6waj3z OR4An0rm7/nueRT5BlgbfeHgMIucsPrj =eojd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
