Fwd: Re: time-to-approve etc. [Re: Trusting the IESG to manage the reform process (was:Re:Doingthe Right Things?)]

Margaret Wasserman mrw at windriver.com
Mon Jun 9 10:39:45 CEST 2003

This didn't make it to the list the first time because Pekka's original
included multiple cc: lines, which my mail reader seems to ignore.


>Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 08:39:48 -0400
>To: Pekka Savola <pekkas at netcore.fi>
>From: Margaret Wasserman <mrw at windriver.com>
>Subject: Re: time-to-approve etc. [Re: Trusting the IESG to manage the 
>reform process (was:Re:Doingthe Right Things?)]
>Hi Pekka,
>At 03:06 PM 6/9/2003 +0300, you wrote:
>>So, my perception is that the most time-consuming thing after submission
>>to the IESG appears to be resolving issues raised by IESG; I hope nobody
>>sees this delay as a problem of IESG :-).
>In most cases, I agree that this isn't an IESG problem...
>However, it is true that cryptic or poorly understood issues can
>take a long time to resolve.  So, if it takes a significant amount
>of time for the WG or authors to understand the IESG's issues,
>that may be the fault of the IESG.
>I also believe that the feedback from the IESG could be offered
>more openly (perhaps by mailing it to the pertinent WG?) which
>would allow the WG to put pressure on the chairs and authors to
>correct the problems.  Right now, it can appear to a WG that a
>document has "disappeared" in the IESG, when actually it is
>waiting for updates from the authors.

More information about the Problem-statement mailing list