Tom,
WG adoption is also a great time, if necessary, for a WG chair to have a
conversation with the authors about reducing the number of authors on the
front page by moving some to a contributors section, and also have them
agree on who holds the pen as the primary editor, as a condition of WG
adoption.
Cheers,
Andy
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 5:05 AM, t.p. <daedulus(_at_)btconnect(_dot_)com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
To: "IETF discussion list" <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 4:09 PM
I've been watching several "WG adoption" threads since Prague,
and I have a question.
Is it useful for authors of a draft to send messages saying things
like "I support the adoption of this draft as a WG document." ?
I'm not asking whether it's right or wrong, just whether such
a message helps the WG Chairs in evaluating consensus.
(I see similar messages from non-authors, and I am definitely
doubtful about them unless they start with something like "I have
read this draft and...".)
Brian
The case that interests me, not that I am ever involved in evaluating
consensus, is the I-D that has eight or ten authors listed on the first
page, an increasingly common occurence in the Routing Area. How many of
those respond and what does that tell me about the likelihood of the
Working Group being able to agree and get incorporated changes? I like
the model of an editor incorporating WG consensus so when only a
minority of the listed authors support adoption, I am tempted to oppose
(not that it makes any difference)!
Tom Petch
Brian