As an initial reflection, it’s clear that there was no consensus, or even emerging consensus, in the room on whether or how to renew the oversight structures around the RFC Editor function. It’s very clear that this community both values that function and appreciates Heather’s service. There remain, though, some important questions about whether the role of the RSOC and the IAB in the overall model needs clarification or requires more fundamental changes. There were additional questions raised about whether updating the relationship between the RSE and RPC would result in a clearer set of responsibilities, about how to provide for direct input of stream managers into the oversight process, and how to assess the impact of change on the broader community of RFC users who are not typically contributors to one of the streams. The list discussion on those topics will likely take some time.
As noted in a previous mail, the RSOC is concurrently asking for comments from the community on a Statement Of Work (SOW) for a potential Request For Proposal (RFP). The comments in the room last night seemed largely supportive of recruiting an RSE who could assist with the community consensus process and the RFC format transition, though there were a few speakers whose contributions suggested a preference for waiting and different ideas about how to conduct the recruitment process. The IAB and RSOC will assess the state of that discussion again when the comment period for the SOW has ended.
Once again, thanks to each of you for the contributions last night, and we ask that you continue the discussion on rfc-interest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Regards,
Ted Hardie
