----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@xxxxxxxxx> To: "t.p." <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx>; "IETF discussion list" <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 2:32 PM > Tom, > > WG adoption is also a great time, if necessary, for a WG chair to have a > conversation with the authors about reducing the number of authors on the > front page by moving some to a contributors section, and also have them > agree on who holds the pen as the primary editor, as a condition of WG > adoption. Yup, and every attempt I have made to make that happen has failed, as some of the WG Chairs on this list will know:-( Tom Petch > Cheers, > Andy > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 5:05 AM, t.p. <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> > > To: "IETF discussion list" <ietf@xxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 4:09 PM > > > > > I've been watching several "WG adoption" threads since Prague, > > > and I have a question. > > > > > > 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 see similar messages from non-authors, and I am definitely > > > doubtful about them unless they start with something like "I have > > > read this draft and...".) > > > > Brian > > > > The case that interests me, not that I am ever involved in evaluating > > consensus, is the I-D that has eight or ten authors listed on the first > > page, an increasingly common occurence in the Routing Area. How many of > > those respond and what does that tell me about the likelihood of the > > Working Group being able to agree and get incorporated changes? I like > > the model of an editor incorporating WG consensus so when only a > > minority of the listed authors support adoption, I am tempted to oppose > > (not that it makes any difference)! > > > > Tom Petch > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > >