Didn’t manage to get this done yesterday. since we’re still in working-the-queue mode (we’ll be discussing PRs and the working copy) IMO it makes more sense to publish post-interim, I.e. IETF Monday.
Sent from my iPhone > On 20 Feb 2021, at 15:22, Kyle Rose <kr...@krose.org> wrote: > > > My PR had been rebased against the head of master, so I just ff-merged it and > pushed. Only #728 is left. > > >> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 9:06 AM Michael Welzl <mich...@ifi.uio.no> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> IMO yes, we can merge these two PRs and go ahead. I’d appreciate if someone >> who’s a little less clumsy than me with the toolchain could do the actual >> submission (recently, Tommy) - but if need be, I can make it happen too. >> >> Cheers, >> Michael >> >> >> > On Feb 19, 2021, at 6:33 PM, Theresa Enghardt <i...@tenghardt.net> wrote: >> > >> > Dear authors of the TAPS Interface draft, >> > >> > I just wanted to check in on whether we think we'll be able to publish a >> > new revision of draft-ietf-taps-interface before the draft deadline next >> > Monday and the upcoming interim next Friday? >> > >> > As far as I can see, there's two outstanding PRs on this draft, which have >> > had a good amount of discussion and some approvals >> > (https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/pull/687 and >> > https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/pull/728). >> > >> > Thanks everyone who's been putting work into this! >> > >> > Best, >> > Theresa >> > >> > _______________________________________________ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
