Re: Question about pre-meeting document posting deadlines for the IESG and the community

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 16 Mar 2024, at 9:19, Carsten Bormann wrote:

I think this discussion should be fact-based, not principle-based.
I happen to work in WGs where the I-D deadline works really well.
It may not work well in your WG, but complain to your WG management, please.

This is an important point, but I come to a different conclusion: If the two week deadline works for some WGs and not for others, this argues for WGs to be able to control whether or not to impose the deadline and for it *not* to be an IETF-wide requirement. Indeed, some WGs might operate in a way that a different deadline (longer or shorter) makes sense.

Please don’t try to “fix” (break) what isn’t broken.

For some WGs, it is broken. So let's have a discussion on what the assorted needs are and only after that decide what rules and tools (if any) are needed.

pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux