Document Blocking (Was: I-D
Bound, Jim
Jim.Bound at hp.com
Fri May 16 22:43:11 CEST 2003
I agree with adding more process. I want them to be accountable to
explain their actions and in writing somewhere that is all.
/jim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore at cs.utk.edu]
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 9:40 PM
> To: Bound, Jim
> Cc: moore at cs.utk.edu; presnick at qualcomm.com;
> problem-statement at alvestrand.no
> Subject: Re: Document Blocking (Was: I-D
>
>
> > I don't disagree with the lightweight process but I think it far
> > easier just to have an IESG member defend their pushback or
> whatever
> > on the mail list and working group. Discuss it with the
> members have
> > debate. If we use this as a more and folkway as part of the
> role and
> > job of an IESG member and document it we don't need yet another
> > process.
>
> My intuitive sense is that IESG has more than enough process
> already, which is part of why I'm resisting suggestions to
> impose more requirements on them.
>
>
More information about the Problem-statement
mailing list