Michael, > On Nov 7, 2019, at 5:39 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> One more comment and then an alternative thought experiment: >> On 08-Nov-19 08:44, Nico Williams wrote: >> .... >> Anyway: my new experiment would be one that the IESG could decide to >> start tomorrow. It's simply that the IESG would only ever issue one form >> of DISCUSS ballot, which would look like this: > >> Pat Areadirector has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-somewg-somedraft-99: Discuss >> .... >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> DISCUSS: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> There are still open issues from the following reviews: >> <links to reviews> > > okay, interesting idea. > >> In other words, the IESG simply busy-waits until all review issues >> have been resolved, rather than finding and fixing the issues >> personally. > > Let's be clear: that means that reviewers are expected to engage with authors > to get the issues resolved. This might surprise some reviewers. Or better, the Document Shepard takes an active role to get the issues resolved. Bob
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
