> Nevil Browmlee has responded to our query about getting > our AFS3 documents published. I have responded with the note below, > but want input from the group: > > Is the paragraph below OK? > > Who could we get as independent reviewers of the documents?
<grumble> If they're OK with creating a WG to do this in Apps, then why aren't we doing that rather than inventing another special-case wheel? Seems like a waste of effort that could be more profitably used elsewhere. </grumble> I have no problem with the paragraph. I don't know that the phrase "future publication not guaranteed" is what we want to hear, though. Sounds like they're making a special case of document #1, but not agreeing to proceed with future docs. Re: independent reviewers: could we suggest that a min of 2 people not involved in the creation of the document would be the independent reviewers? _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
