ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Idea for a process experiment to reward running code...

2012-12-02 09:01:20


On 12/01/2012 11:51 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 12/1/12 2:21 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
My reluctance to get into this is based on an opinion that process
change proposals with more words attached tend to just not happen,
so fewer words is better.

I think that's actually a pretty terrible reason.  

Well, I think its an ok reason for not fully answering Dave's
question in this case, given the latitude offered by RFC 3933.
Tactical reticence like this would not be a reason to adopt
anything, I agree.

The goal is
not to get the proposal through, the goal is to improve
something.  That said, while I don't like change just for the
sake of change I think that change for the sake of betterment is
a very good thing indeed.  The main thing is that I've been trying
to figure out where the harm would be here and I haven't been
able to identify anything substantive.  I'd be good with giving
this a limited run and seeing how it goes.

Great.
S.


Melinda



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>