Hi Joe,
On 01/22/2013 04:39 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
Hi, all,
On 1/11/2013 8:21 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Hi Alexa,
Please be aware of this document that has just entered a four-week
IETF last
call. The document describes a proposed IETF process experiment under
the rules
of RFC 3933.
The proposed experiment calls on the IETF Secretariat to take specific
actions
under certain circumstances in corner cases of the experiment. C
This is a silly idea.
So you're in two minds about it eh:-)
First, running code should already be considered as part of the context
of review.
Second, running code is not correlated to correctness, appropriateness,
or safety. See Linux for numerous examples.
Third, running code doesn't mean the doc is sufficient that multiple
parties can generate interoperable instances. It's merely the sound of
one hand clapping ;-)
Your second and third and points seem opposed to your first.
The latter ones imply that running code is useless, the first
one says its not.
I don't believe any of us have any quantitative basis on which to
base assertions that this will improve or dis-improve our processes
or output, or be neutral. (Hence proposing it as an experiment.)
Finally, NOTHING should circumvent the multi-tiered review process. That
process helps reduce the burden on the community at large via the
presumption that smaller groups with more context have already reviewed
proposals before they get to the broader community.
I disagree with the shouted "NOTHING" - if there are non-silly
ways in which we figure we can improve our processes then we
ought be open to trying 'em out. You may or may not be right
that this is silly, but merely asserting that it is doesn't
make it so.
Being stuck with current processes or only ever adding more
review tiers would IMO be sillier than this proposal. But
that seems to be where we're mostly at.
This is a bad idea even as an experiment.
Sorry, I don't get the "bad" aspect - rhetoric aside, in what
way do you see running this experiment doing harm?
S.
Joe