> Can we move forward with the work at hand now?
I find your tone to be dismissive – which in general isn't in the spirit of
moving things forward. Your comment on the MAC spec is tangential.
Hannes never replied that Eran's request to wait for the ABNF was a problem nor
to confirm Mike's ass
g WG (oauth@ietf.org)
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] New draft process / editor role
Hi Eran, Hi all,
The story is fairly simple: We have three authors on draft-ietf-oauth-v2.
Having more than one author is helpful in case others are busy.
We had open issues with the document and we discussed them on the list
Hi Franklin,
On Jun 9, 2012, at 7:09 AM, Franklin Tse wrote:
> I think the chairs should clarify and explain, via this mailing list,
>
> 1. Whether they have authorized Mike Jones and Dick Hardt to author and
> publish the draft
Derek and I had asked for a new draft version. We are interested
Hi Eran, Hi all,
The story is fairly simple: We have three authors on draft-ietf-oauth-v2.
Having more than one author is helpful in case others are busy.
We had open issues with the document and we discussed them on the list. Text
was proposed and feedback was provided to the list. Thanks eve
On Jun 9, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
> On 6/9/12 12:56 AM, Dick Hardt wrote:
>> Mike emailed me the draft and asked if I would publish it.
>> I reviewed the draft and I thought it captured consensus.
>
> Chairs call consensus.
Agreed. I thought it captured the consensus that Hannes
On 6/9/12 12:56 AM, Dick Hardt wrote:
Mike emailed me the draft and asked if I would publish it.
I reviewed the draft and I thought it captured consensus.
Chairs call consensus.
I noted that Hannes had asked Eran to publish the edits a week ago
There have been numerous indications that Eran h
Mike emailed me the draft and asked if I would publish it.
I reviewed the draft and I thought it captured consensus.
I noted that Hannes had asked Eran to publish the edits a week ago
There have been numerous indications that Eran has lost interest in continuing
as editor. Eg. his decision to
Yes, it would be helpful (and I think reasonable) to have an explanation of
why the process was changed so wildly from the past twenty-six drafts.
--David
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 9:09 PM, Franklin Tse wrote:
> I think the chairs should clarify and explain, via this mailing list,
>
> 1. Whether t
I think the chairs should clarify and explain, via this mailing list,
1. Whether they have authorized Mike Jones and Dick Hardt to author and publish
the draft
2a. If they have given the authorization, why they needed to do so and why the
editor was not notified;
2b. Otherwise, whether the cur
+1
>
> From: Anthony Nadalin
>To: Eran Hammer ; "oauth@ietf.org WG (oauth@ietf.org)"
>
>Sent: Friday, June 8, 2012 7:18 PM
>Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] New draft process / editor role
>
>
>
>Why rant here, talk to the ch
Why rant here, talk to the chairs or AD
Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Eran Hammer
Sent: 6/8/2012 6:58 PM
To: oauth@ietf.org WG (oauth@ietf.org)
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] New draft process / editor role
Today, a new draft of the OAuth 2.0 specification was published
Today, a new draft of the OAuth 2.0 specification was published.
* I had nothing to do with this draft. I did not edit or authored it. I didn't
know it was being published.
* The draft was authored by Mike Jones and published by Dick Hardt.
* Neither one is an editor or an active author of the do
12 matches
Mail list logo
