Adrian Farrel <adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
>> This is yet another process document that, no matter how
>> much the text protests otherwise, will probably be used as a club in
>> some future contentious WG discussion to try to beat opponents into
>> submission.
> At the moment we don't seem to be able to move for fear of clubbing WGs
at some future unspecified time.
> And at the same time we have WG chairs saying "please give us a bit of
general guidance on some topics".
I read the document, and I find it useful.
So, as a guide to chairs, I think that all of the work/text has value.
This document is going forward as Informational rather than BCP.
While it represents some kind of consensus (and if it's the consensus of the
IESG as to how the IESG wants things done, that's important to know), I think
it's important that it's a guideline.
As such it doesn't have any force to club WG chairs.
But at the same time, having no force, I wonder at the value of putting this
into any place other than the wg-chairs wiki.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>, Sandelman Software Works
pgpyDIJkUXabH.pgp
Description: PGP signature