Re: [apps-review] Apps review team review request template

SM <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Fri, 23 September 2011 21:49 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: apps-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 659FD21F8CE8 for <apps-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.58
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 40PboPipSRgJ for <apps-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:49:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9054021F8CE6 for <apps-review@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:49:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.239.67]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8NLpk7T002335; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:51:52 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1316814714; bh=ckIJ8vit68avCeC12vYNs74jNsY=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=R+xQwZqIh2o1EiVnDphC5TKkOUJew9Wm6wKfypOFeoKHKvkbFXgxUqODsXYS2uolF wLdaHw1MxuuLR8+2DpLFSIlpxR6V5qgG119C7t8opGuZm6pJD2FdgsGDBIrHHJBjeM 3EcXgwP/ZAwFyyotjXrx1Cuk4h1hbXtjBG73Ym0U=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20110923141321.09b2aca0@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:51:31 -0700
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
From: SM <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJ+RiDtY-6XmaacWQmgtsLLxyDAouehphdEwh2DCS+1_Rg@mail.g mail.com>
References: <CALaySJ+xdPc-oi7BHisgnFcJ-LffyU=YCyv1rn6Zcarf_biXBQ@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20110923131713.09b6ade8@elandnews.com> <CALaySJ+RiDtY-6XmaacWQmgtsLLxyDAouehphdEwh2DCS+1_Rg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: apps-review@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-review] Apps review team review request template
X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Apps Area Review List <apps-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 21:49:27 -0000

Hi Barry,
At 14:11 23-09-2011, Barry Leiba wrote:
>I think it's not.  I would mention pervasive or significant editorial
>points (for example, if something is consistently wrong through the
>document, or if the grammar is particularly bad, such that another
>editor with better English skills should be added), but I wouldn't
>bother picking small points in an early review.

Thanks for the advice.  I am going to follow it.

>Ah.  So this isn't plugged into the regular tools wiki, then?  Can
>that be changed?  Or should we leave it?  What do the ADs think?

No, www.apps.ietf.org is not part of IETF infrastructure or run by 
the Tools teams.  I had a short discussion about that with the Apps 
ADs last year.  I preferred to leave it.

Best regards,
-sm