At 02:59 PM 4/8/2002 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
one reading of the data is to see what has happened in the past, in order
to see what's reasonable to expect from the future.
yes. and another is to consider whether we are satisfied with what is
happening now.
for instance, it is not uncommon for a WG to expect to produce an RFC less
than 6 months after it starts.
the fact that it almost never happens is an indication that one may want
to be skeptical about charters that specify it - and ask what the
extraordinary measures are that the chairs intend to apply to achieve that
goal.
Another, very different reaction to the disparity between promise and
accomplishment is to ensure that working groups meet their milestones.
To carry this to an extreme: If it is not reasonable for a working group
to achieve a 6-month (or 12-month, or whatever is being proposed)
milestone, is the effort ready to be an IETF working group?
This takes the view that it may be exactly proper to target a 6-month
milestone, and that what is improper is not reaching it.
So, rather than simply challenging the specification of an aggressive
milestone, we could seek aggressive management that will achieve it.
Perhaps a middle ground is to be aggressive in demanding that the working
group folks substantiate why anyone should believe the milestones...
d/
----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:dave(_at_)tribalwise(_dot_)com>
TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850