On 2012-04-20 16:12, Stewart Bryant wrote:
On 20/04/2012 14:36, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
What about the idea of requiring new Experimental documents to include
text that indicates when the experiment is to be considered completed
absent new work on it? Essentially, the document declares a date by
which the experiment is considered concluded, and code points
automatically deprecated, and the document itself goes to Historic
status, unless some other document action updates the deadline or
moves the work to the Standards Track.
If you factor in the historic success rate that engineers typically have
in predicting s/w development schedules, I would expect that the overrun
rate on predicted end exp dates would be close to 100%, even after
several extensions.
Exactly. This whole discussion seems to be about over-engineering a
small corner of the IETF process that isn't a particular source
of practical problems anyway, afaik.
So, the standard question: what's the problem that needs solving here?
Brian