Dear all, > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:00 AM Barry Leiba <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It's been around six months since we started the <last-call@xxxxxxxx> > > list, and we said that we would evaluate the results after six months. > > To that end, the IESG would like to see comments about how it's been > > working. > > > > Please respond to this thread to comment. It would be helpful if the > > first line of your comment gave a succinct view of your opinion on the > > following 5-to-1 scale: > > > > 5: Perfect! Don't even think about going back! > > 4: I really like it and want to keep it. > > 3: Neutral: I don't care either way. > > 2: I don't like it, but I can live with it if we decide to keep it. > > 1: It's terrible! Please, please go back to the old way! > > > > And, of course, if you have further comments beyond those numbers, > > include those as well. We want to know what you think. Comments, > > please, in the next couple of weeks, by 15 May. Thanks! 4 It feels like another layer of the ietf@xxxxxxxx onion has been peeled off. As our understanding of what the IETF is evolves, it seems we've now recognised there are conversations on different planes, and it also seems there is no apparent downside to separating some off to last-call@. I suspect adoption of last-call@ will continue to grow a bit if the change is made permanent. It is likely at times discussions still will froth over from one list to another, but if this new list-setup helps us *most of the time*, I'd say that is a win. :-) Kind regards, Job
