I read the document, and I replying to Harald's point form summary because it
captures my concern in fewer words.
How can I reconcile:
"Extended sequences of virtual interim meetings should be the exception"
with:
> - An expectation that virtual interims will become more commonplace
> over time
6tisch has had 1hr virtual interim meetings approximately every second Friday
since the WG was chartered. Perhaps 20 of them occured in each of 2014 and 2015.
I agree that finding a time (zone!) that suits a large enough set of people
is difficult, and often exclusionary.
{My experience is that UTC-0900 people are the hardest to convince to
accomodate UTC+900 people... mind you, they put up with a lot of 6am and 7am
meeting times which are often the best "compromise". Given how many core
contributors/editors are in UTC-900, it's hard to have meetings without them}
> My impression is that we should call these meetings "editor meetings",
> "design team meetings" or something else - but expecting a *WG* to show
> up at weekly phonecalls is a Really Bad Idea, and we shouldn't encorage
> more WGs adopting such a practice.
I'm not happy with the trend towards formalized design teams with unclear
ways in which members are "chosen". In practice, they do not operate fully
within the Note Well (in practice!), nor are they clearly informal
arrangements.
I would prefer to have a WG document-foo editing meeting created as a virtual
interim, with the understanding that:
1) anyone can show up with an issue, it's a WG meeting.
2) it's not so formal that any decisions can be made, so there is
really nothing to "miss".
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature