Re: Tracking resolution of DISCUSSes

[John Leslie <john at jlc.net>]

Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 2007-01-17 16:41, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> 
>>> I think you are deeply misunderstanding how PROTO shepherding is
>>> supposed to work.
>>
>> That's a pretty basic disconnect.
>>
>> Perhaps you can summarize how it is supposed to work?
> 
> The way it's described in draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding,
> which makes it plain to me that the shepherd is taking
> responsibility for ensuring that issues are resolved through
> open process.

   I presume Brian wants to call our attention to:
] 
] (3.e)  The Document Shepherd then communicates the DISCUSS and
]        COMMENT items to the document editors and the working group,
]        alerting them of any changes to the document that have
]        accumulated during IESG processing, such as "Notes to the RFC
]        Editor."  If any changes will be substantive, the Document
]        Shepherd, in consultation with the Responsible Area Director,
]        as during other stages, MUST seek working group consensus.

   ("then" is perhaps a bit out of context: see the named document.)
Note the steps 3.[abcd] which precede it.

   I sense a perception that not all of this is happening. IMHO, we
need to avoid the "quick fix" of claiming an automated posting to the
mailing-list can substitute for these steps. Nonetheless, it might be
that an automated notification that a DISCUSS remains outstanding
some number of days after the telechat could help bring immediacy to
the process...

--
John Leslie <john at jlc.net>

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf