----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Pelletier" <rpelletier(_at_)isoc(_dot_)org>
To: <adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk>
Cc: "Thomas Narten" <narten(_at_)us(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com>; "IETF list"
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 3:29 PM
On May 3, 2013, at 10:20 AM, "Adrian Farrel"
<adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk>
wrote:
Well said, Thomas.
Two concrete suggestions:
1) have WGs do the managing role more proactively
Provide WG Chairs the monitoring tools they need to be proactive -
Action Tracker, what do I need to do today data tracker views. Same
for AD.
<tp>
Such as a list once a month, sent to the list of each active WG, of the
state change, if any, in the I-Ds which have been accepted by the WG as
work items, giving the date at which the last state change occurred.
State is not just the IESG type tracker state, but also a new revision
of the I-D.
I know how useful I find this from the WG Chairs who produce it already.
Tom Petch
Same for authors and their mentors, if any.
Ray
2) mentor authors and others a bit more to encourage them how best to
operate
Which I suspect means...
0) have ADs manage/mentor the WG chairs more proactively.
Almost certainly a case of "if I had less work to do I would have more
time to
do the things that would reduce my workload." :-)
WG chairs might like to comment, but I suspect that one lunchtime
training
session every four months does not constitute proactive management.
Adrian