Dave Cridland <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 1) AUTH48 is interesting as a metric; it's clearly an indicator of a
> document actually getting published, and one that doesn't get delayed
> outside the author's control unlike publication. Moreover, anyone going
> through AUTH48 has had to deal with an IESG telechat on their document;
> that's extremely useful experience in leadership selection. Possibly
> "last call" and "telechat" are also good enough - and interesting in as
> much as a document that "fails" last call is arguably as important a
> contribution as one that goes on to publication.
So, instead of AUTH48, you'd pick an earlier state like IESG Review.
(see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/help/state/draft-iesg/, but
actually I think write-up and the diagram are old and missing some states...)
That (perhaps correctly) skips things that go through the Independent
Submission Stream.
I agree that including the authors into the state above solves the problem of
a document which is so good that it needs no review and no tickets.
> 2) I think the document uploader concept is good, but limiting the
> documents to only those which get scheduled time in a WG session isn't
> so good; some WGs don't meet often, or even at all, and a document
> that's so well crafted that it doesn't need discussion in a face to
> face meeting is a really good document in my opinion. Clearly we don't
> want arbitrary documents either. Any WG document would seem a "good"
> contribution, and I suspect any document with a shepherd assigned
> should be safe, too, since that effectively implies an expectation to
> publish.
The problem with shephard assigned is that it could be very late in the
process, and a document which *does* get a lot of discussion and revision,
represents a lot of contribution of effort. It is not unreasonable to me
that a single document occupies the entire IETF "life" of 3-4 persons.
> 3) This works for WGs that use a ticketing system and have
> meetings. Not sure what percentage that actually is.
A number of WG chairs don't like the current ticketing system, but increasing
I think that WGs are going to use some ticket system.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature