On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 02:39:51PM +0000, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: iesg <iesg-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Warren Kumari > > Sent: 09 August 2020 17:33 > > To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: IESG <iesg@xxxxxxxx>; Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; IETF > > discussion list <ietf@xxxxxxxx>; Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@xxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: dealing with AD reviews in the week before the IESG call > > > > On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 11:29 AM Barry Leiba <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > > > > Speaking only for myself: I would always prefer to be reviewing the > > > latest version available at the time I'm reviewing, and I don't care > > > whether it's not the same version that another AD reviewed, nor that I > > > might start reviewing one version and see another posted before I'm > > > done. > > > > > > In other words, I'd rather have updates posted when the judgment of > > > the authors, working groups, and sponsoring ADs says they should be. > > > > > > > Me too! Update early, update often. If I comment on an older version, > > and the issues have already been addressed, thats perfectly fine / > > preferred... > [RW] > > Agreed. As long as the authors accept that some reviews/comments may be against older versions, then responsive authors fixing the text as the reviews come in generally seems like a good thing. If an AD is reviewing a document closer to the telechat deadline, then generally any improvements that have already been made to the text normally makes the document easier/quicker to review. I'm of a similar opinion as Warren, Barry, and Rob -- I'm happy to see fixes get posted in a new I-D so that I can review the "latest and greatest" that's available. I do make a note of which version I'm reviewing, at least in my local notes, so that I have an easier time tracking things down if a new version is posted before I'm done. That said, you can always ask the AD responsible for the document in question whether you should upload a new version; they should have a pretty good idea for the general sense of the IESG at that time. -Ben
