On 4/24/15 11:12 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
> Things have obviously changed. We have gotten the name or names on the
> first page tied up with questions of attribution, IPR issues, the
> entirely different conventions of more academic/scholarly and formal
> publications and carryover of assumptions from other communities more
> broadly, and with compensation and performance review polices in a
> number of companies. I'd like to go back; I don't see how.
If we can come up with a way of providing attribution in a way that Tenure
Committees understand, then I don't care what goes on page 1.
(And if Tenure Committees understand, then I think that will likely solve
the problems of other communities.)
insofar as I am aware tenure committies have never looked at
standardization activities with much favor and I don't think anything
here will change that.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>, Sandelman Software
Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature