Roman (SecAD) pointed out off-list that we have a created process for exactly this sort of thing, and so I have proposed a new charter, and it can be approved by the IESG "without external review".
Thanks Roman and David, W On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:51 AM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 12:14 PM, Kazuhiro Somers-Harris <david. > somers-harris=40rakuten....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I found a typo in the opsawg charter > > > > Current text: > > > the following pieces of information would the foundation for the > document > > > > Proposed text: > > > the following pieces of information would be the foundation for the > document > > > > I’ve never authored or edited drafts or charters before so not sure what > to do to fix this let alone whether it’s even worth it, but I’m happy to > learn if it’s helpful. > > > Good catch — I suspect that mental-autocorrect had just been filling in > the missing 'be' all of these years... > > I checked, and it seems that there is no easy way to fix nits in charters > - the tooling views any change as a "let's recharter!", not "Doh, I can't > type so good..." > > This means that we could: > 1: recharter > or > 2: talk to the tools team and add a feature request to allow fixing nits > or > 3: ignore it for now, and fix it next time we recharter. > > I'll ask someone on the tools team how hard it would be to either 1: add a > "this is just a nit fix" button, or 2: quietly edit the text in the > database while we all look the other way and pretend we didn't see > anything. If neither of these is really easy I'd think we should just take > route 3 (unless anyone objects). > W > > > > > > Thanks, > > David > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > >
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
