Subject: Re: Thread implementation

From: Raul Dias <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:20:47 -0200

>On Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:03:52 -0200, Raul Dias wrote:
>> btw, why draft-ietf-imapext-thread-07.txt and other related drafts are not
>> in the docs/ dir?
>
>It's because it's an Internet Draft with an expiration, as opposed to an RFC.
>If you read the introductory text you'll see that `It is inappropriate to use
>Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
>progress."'
>
>Unfortunately, IESG has gotten pretty bureaucratic and political, and so IDs
>can be stalled for quite some time before they are permitted to be published
>as RFCs.  In the case of SORT and THREAD, they were stalled for a long time
>for political reasons, and when those politics were finally exposed for the
>idiocy that they were, it's now stalled for a revision of the definition for
>how non-ASCII texts are sorted.

Sad to hear it.

However what the damage to include them in a doc/drafts/ (as opposed to doc/rfc/)
as imapd already implements it.

This would be a good help for developers to understand it and have another source 
of information other than the source code.
The developer would understand that it can't rely this as the introdutory text says.

Regards,

Raul Dias