WG Quality Processes WG

Scott W Brim swb at employees.org
Mon Jun 2 13:23:35 CEST 2003

I'm just reluctant to make it a WG without an immutable time-to-live,
less than a year.  I want them to take on just one or two possible
changes at a time.  A change which is so major that it takes longer
should be shepherded by the IESG (at this group's instigation?).  It can
be recreated (not just rechartered) every time.  We have a precedent,
the NomCom.  I don't want the group to get stuck in its ways.

On Sat, May 31, 2003 10:05:24PM -0400, Margaret Wasserman allegedly wrote:
>     A working group should be formed in the General Area of the IETF to
>     oversee improvements to the quality processes used in IETF WGs, and
>     to increase the effectiveness of IETF reviews at all levels.  This
>     group should take an experimental, iterative approach to these
>     improvements:
>          - Identify and prioritize a set of promising proposals for
>            improvement.
>          - Figure out what each proposal is trying to improve (in
>            measurable terms) and define a metric to measure performance
>            in that area.
>          - Determine the current level of performance against the
>            defined metric.
>          - Institute each change in a few representative WGs (on a
>            volunteer basis).
>          - Measure the results to determine if each change was
>            successful.
>          - Make successful changes available IETF-wide, by publishing
>            them in BCP RFCs.
>          - As necessary, train WG chairs and other participants on the
>            how to implement the successful improvements in their WGs.
>          - Repeat as necessary.

More information about the Problem-statement mailing list