Could these be stuck in the guidelines for now, so I don't have to search for this message? :-)
On Thu, May 11, 2006 09:46:10AM +0200, Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote: > We still see cases where authors are puzzled about what > to do in response to Gen-ART reviews. Sometimes they rush > to produce a new version, which may be the wrong thing > to do for several reasons. I'd like to suggest two variants > of the boilerplate for the beginning of reviews: > > For IETF Last Call reviews: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-FOOBAR.txt. > For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at > <http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>. > > Please resolve these comments along with any other > Last Call comments you may receive. > > ----------------------------------- > > For IESG Evaluation reviews: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-FOOBAR.txt. > For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at > <http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>. > > Please wait for direction from your document shepherd > or AD before posting a new version of the draft. > > Brian > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
