Bernard, On 2008-01-11 09:58, Bernard Aboba wrote: ... > BTW, I'd note that there were some issues in the scheduling of this > GEN-ART review, given that the document was to have been considered > on the IESG agenda today. As a result, Sam objected to my addressing your > comments (even though the changes were purely editorial) and will delay > the processing of the document (see below). So perhaps the GEN-ART > reviews need to come in sooner (or the IESG needs to be informed when > they are going to come in so they are not suprised).
Having seen this from both sides of the fence, I think it's very hard to avoid occasional glitches of this nature. I can never say when my review will be done - and I send it in immediately that it is done. We try to get them to Russ ASAP, but in practice we have only 2 or 3 working days between the review assignments and when Russ needs them. Sometimes, they come in late, but it's unpredictable. Our standard review boilerplate says: "Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft." In practice, that means: don't update the draft until after the IESG telechat, so that all IESG comments can be handled simultaneously. Remember that Gen-ART is reviewing on behalf of the General AD - if Russ decides that the reviewer's comments are unimportant, he'll ballot No Objection. Brian _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
