grenville armitage wrote:
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
[...] as I read it, it was to take the
discussion to an ad hoc WG after exposing the issue on the main list.
How is that different from exposing an issue on the 'main list'
and then telling people to subscribe-to/jump-to poisson for
continued discussion?
What's to stop these ad hoc WGs from ending being populated only
by people interested in process discussions anyway? Seems like
we'll be back to the purported problem with poisson, but with more
mailing list creation/removal overhead.
Well, that is an experimental question. My feeling is that if a specific
process question comes up - let's say, a proposal to increase IAB
membership to 99 seats, to create a silly example - we could have a
much more focussed discussion in the "iab99" WG with a very limited
charter than has proved possible in recent years in Poisson. And really
that is the only change that Harald has proposed, when you drill down.
Brian