Re: [codec] draft test and processing plan for the IETF Codec

[Ron <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 09:32:23AM -0400, Stephen Botzko wrote:
> if we see a result that concerns us, we can follow up.  Perhaps the
> test plan should say this explicitly, or perhaps we can just agree to
> discuss needed follow-ups when we see the results.

I believe that is exactly the solution that is being explored in the
<[e-mail]> subthread, which begins:

 I gave some more thought on your proposed test plan and as Cullen
 suggested, I think the main cause of disagreement is not that much on
 the testing, but on the conditions for publishing (large number of BT,
 NWT). Considering that ultimately, the decision to publish a spec is
 always based on WG consensus, then I think that problem can be
 completely bypassed. Once we make it up to the individuals to decide,
 then we can focus on "simply" designing a good test.

So let's get started on the tests that people individually think are
important so that we have their results to consider by the time we
think we have enough information to decide.

Do you see anything wrong with that solution?  It looks about as fair
and thorough as we can make it to everyone to me.

Cheers,
Ron