Spencer pointed out that I had only sent my response to him - that was unintentional.
-----Original Message----- From: Barnes, Mary (RICH2:AR00) Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 11:49 AM To: 'Spencer Dawkins' Subject: RE: [Gen-art-private] GenART document updated Hi Spencer, This is a valid concern, however, I really think it has to be up to the reviewer. I did update the document to reflect that when you do send to the IETF discussion list that you must cc the author. I personally think that not all reviews need to go to the IETF list for several reasons: 1) The Ready reviews and those that are just nits or suggestions to rewrite for clarification or in particular when folks have questions just add noise IMHO. 2) My experience is that it's far more problematic when things go to the IETF discussion list that really should go to authors first (or at least cc authors!) so they can clarify things - I personally have a very recent experience with this that I have yet to untangle. IMHO, the only reason why the IETF discussion list is suggested is for the same reason that gen-art folks don't want to send to WG mailing lists - it's not practical, so the IETF discussion list is the default place for lack of a better place. 3) The gen-art reviews are public and we are actually the most open of the review teams IMHO - i.e., we can't get to sec-dir archives and they typically are sent to a much smaller subset of folks than the gen-art reviews (in my experience). So, it certainly isn't at all difficult for anyone that wants to augment a gen-art review to go out to the spreadsheet at the end of IETF-LC and review the comments and provide any additional feedback they deem is necessary. Again, my experience is that the comments that do come in via the IETF discussion list are almost always late. That all said, I can update the document and guidelines to reflect whatever you all think is best. But, I would still have concerns over email explosions if we do this. Mary. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Spencer Dawkins Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 11:34 AM To: Private Gen-ART Mailing List Subject: Re: [Gen-art-private] GenART document updated Dear Mary, Thanks for your quick response to my suggestions. I've got one open item left, and it's not something you and I can decide on our own... Dear Gen-ART, Mary and Russ are being pretty consistent (from what I can tell) in saying "Gen-ART Last Call comments are the same as everyone else's Last Call comments" - but the IESG has stated a preferred venue for Last Call comments (the IETF discussion list, with the IESG list as an alternative in exceptional cases), and has stated a preferred format (reply to the Last Call announcement, and don't change the subject line). Almost none of us do that, as you point out in your response. That kind of blows the "we're the same as everybody else" meme. We might BE "special", but I'd like us to decide that explicitly. Full disclosure: I started sending last call reviews to the IETF discussion list long after we started providing reviews at Last Call time, and my review last week was the first one where I've EVER replied to the Last Call announcement so I had the requested subject line, so my hands aren't clean here. o Not a problem? Spencer should go back to sleep, or at least to his day job, and ADs, working group chairs, working group participants, and authors will see our reviews in a variety of venues with a variety of subject lines? o We could actually agree to use the format the IESG requests for Last Call comments, sending our reviews to the IETF list if it's more than "ready for publication", and (maybe) to the IESG list if it's "ready for publication"? o We could actually agree on what we would all do, which may not be the same as what everyone else does at Last Call comment time, and write that down? I don't want to just ask Russ what the answer is here before asking other reviewers what makes sense to them. I know that some people have expressed concern that the IETF discussion list is not a reasonable place to send review comments for drafts at last call time, for example. I'm assuming Russ would like to know what we're seeing before stating an opinion, and before talking to other ADs if that's appropriate. What makes sense to you? Thanks, Spencer _______________________________________________ Gen-art-private mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art-private _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
