Re: WG adoption threads

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

 



Reading this thread makes me think of two points:

First, as a WG chair, I don't usually count messages. Or if I do, it's as trivia more than anything else. I do care about the collective sentiment (I.e. Consensus) and I care deeply about anything that might qualify as a material issue. An adoption poll is really just a semi-organized period of time during which I'll evaluate these more concertedly. 

Second, when I ask the WG about adoption of a draft I try to indicate whether I think consensus exists to adopt. I interpret responses in that context. So, if I say that I think there is consensus to adopt then a bunch of people agreeing with me doesn't mean much. But it's an opportunity to hear material objections. I don't usually waste the WG's time on polls unless I think there is consensus, but I suppose variations on this process could work for other chairs. 

Cheers,
-Benson



On Monday, August 3, 2015, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 8/3/15 7:09 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Is it useful for authors of a draft to send messages saying things
> like "I support the adoption of this draft as a WG document." ?
>
> I'm not asking whether it's right or wrong, just whether such
> a message helps the WG Chairs in evaluating consensus.

I raised this last year on the wg chairs mailing list.  I personally
don't find it very helpful, although others have indicated that a
*lack* of support from authors would be interesting.

I generally don't like things that smack of voting, and that includes
"I support" messages that contain no other information.

Melinda


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