On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:54:13PM +0200, Benno Overeinder wrote: > Mukund, > > On 29/04/2022 22:27, Mukund Sivaraman wrote: > > > > > > This is indeed how the DNSOP chairs see it and have guided the (new set of) > > > authors in this way. We have also asked Haisheng to contact the secretariat > > > to correct the situation as we cannot withdraw individual drafts or change > > > status. > > > > With the way this is worded, is it accepted practice for the names of > > authors of a document to be removed to make way for another set of > > authors? > > No, certainly not. If you interpret it that way, I have chosen the wrong > words. > > What I meant to say is that we made suggestions or try to guide the > practical procedure for changing the status of document to indicate that it > is not an active document. OK, I think I have misunderstood the last 2 emails in this thread. > The broader discussion of whether it is an accepted practice or not was not > the subject of my answer to the list. As I understand there is a discussion > in the IESG now, and with the email thread on the list and Brian's draft, > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-carpenter-whats-an-author-02, we > can make progress to better define the process and provide guidance to > authors and IETF participants. That sounds good. I browsed through Carpenter's draft. Section 7 in it is about how to fork (which is welcome), and it sounds reasonable. Mukund
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
