![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Agreement, but niggles....
Harald
--On 7. januar 2007 11:17 +0100 Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org> wrote:
"Adrian Farrel" <adrian at olddog.co.uk> writes:
By the way, would it be possible for all DISCUSSes and COMMENTs for I-Ds originated by a working group to be *automatically* copied to the mailing list of the working group? The reasons are: - the WG chairs, editors, and interested parties should not have to monitor the I-D tracker to spot them - there is otherwise no automatic archiving of the follow-up discussions - it can often be hard to tell from the record how/if/why a DISCUSS was cleared (the entries in the I-D tracker do not usually show this information) - the WG has an obvious interest in the follow-up discussions - if the discussions result in changes to the I-D the WG really needs to be kept in the loop
I agree, something along those steps seems quite useful. My experience is that not all of the people who have an interest in a document reads and thinks about DISCUSS/COMMENT's. In some cases, I recall that COMMENTs were not even forwarded to me as document author, I had to find them in the I-D tracker myself. I think this has changed now, but doing what you suggest would go even further to make sure that the IESG comments are widely seen and thought about.
/Simon
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.