OPEN ISSUE: Quality Process WG Charter

[James Kempf]

Agree.

            jak

----- Original Message -----
From: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" <harald at alvestrand.no>
To: "Keith Moore" <moore at cs.utk.edu>; "Margaret Wasserman"
<mrw at windriver.com>
Cc: <problem-statement at alvestrand.no>
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 6:23 AM
Subject: Re: OPEN ISSUE: Quality Process WG Charter


>
>
> --On torsdag, mai 29, 2003 09:04:54 -0400 Keith Moore
<moore at cs.utk.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >> So, do we have consensus to start the near-term WG to
> >> improve the WG quality processes and IETF review
> >> processes?
> >
> > I fear that if we do this, the WG will spend too much time on
review
> > processes and not enough time on WG operation.  But I'm not sure
what to
> > do about it: both subjects need attention, and if we created two
separate
> > WGs then the one working on extra-WG review might attract a lot
more
> > interest than the one working on WG operation.
>
> I think this WG would/should be focused on the WG process, and
review as
> one tool to improve that process.
> This should not be confused with the issues surrounding end-of-line
IESG
> review (although one hopes that improving one would make the other
far less
> problematic).
>
> My understanding....
>
>                Harald
>
>