IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-review] Early Cursory Reviews (Was: Suggested changes for Applications Area Review Team)

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Mon, 21 March 2011 20:58 UTC

Return-Path: <msk@cloudmark.com>
X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D7F028C17C for <apps-review@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:58:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.57
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.57 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.971, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id re5dauHcIQR1 for <apps-review@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:58:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98BD43A68CB for <apps-review@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:58:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by spite.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.72]) with mapi; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:00:00 -0700
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>, SM <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:59:59 -0700
Thread-Topic: [apps-review] Early Cursory Reviews (Was: Suggested changes for Applications Area Review Team)
Thread-Index: Acvmiua0snCxms+8RE+h3jvIfylVHgBf8SNQ
Message-ID: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331999B@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110318165117.0d43e6e0@elandnews.com> <4D850453.1090509@qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D850453.1090509@qualcomm.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "apps-review@ietf.org" <apps-review@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-review] Early Cursory Reviews (Was: Suggested changes for Applications Area Review Team)
X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Apps Area Review List <apps-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 20:58:28 -0000

Howdy Pete,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: apps-review-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:apps-review-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pete Resnick
> Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 12:30 PM
> To: SM
> Cc: apps-review@ietf.org
> Subject: [apps-review] Early Cursory Reviews (Was: Suggested changes for Applications Area Review Team)
>
> [...]
> So the questions for the team:
> 
> 1. Is this the sort of thing you think you all would be willing to do?

Yes.

> 2. How often would you be willing to do it? For example, is it
> reasonable to ask people to look at one document per week for this kind
> of quick review?

At the level of detail you're talking about, weekly seems like an OK request to me.

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email