IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Icar] an early review experiment

Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org> Wed, 19 May 2004 21:59 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA22505 for <icar-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:59:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQZ2K-0001zV-Hn for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:55:40 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4JLteFF007648 for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:55:40 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQYnG-00056u-DM for icar-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:40:06 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA20470 for <icar-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:40:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQYnD-0004qg-Hs for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:40:03 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQYkQ-0004Da-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:37:11 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQYfL-0003TK-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:31:55 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQYRJ-0002yf-9C; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:17:25 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQXXe-0006jr-A5 for icar@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:19:54 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11614 for <icar@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:19:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQXXc-0006jy-G4 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:19:52 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQXWd-0006Wh-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:18:51 -0400
Received: from wyvern.icir.org ([192.150.187.14]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQXVB-0006Fy-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:17:21 -0400
Received: from guns.icir.org (adsl-68-76-113-50.dsl.bcvloh.ameritech.net [68.76.113.50]) by wyvern.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i4JKHJim061673; Wed, 19 May 2004 13:17:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mallman@guns.icir.org)
Received: from guns.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by guns.icir.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D137477AA5C; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:17:17 -0400 (EDT)
To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
From: Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org>
Reply-To: mallman@icir.org
Cc: icar@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Icar] an early review experiment
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.58.0405191316190.77504@measurement-factory.com>
Organization: ICSI Center for Internet Research (ICIR)
Song-of-the-Day: Panama
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 16:17:17 -0400
Message-Id: <20040519201717.D137477AA5C@guns.icir.org>
Sender: icar-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: icar-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: icar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar>, <mailto:icar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Improved Cross-Area Review <icar.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:icar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:icar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar>, <mailto:icar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60

I want to take a tangent for a moment...

> IMO, WG MUST publicly address all reviewer concerns, but can do so any
> way it wants. WG MAY reject to act on any comment, for any reason, but
> MUST publicly document that the comment is rejected and SHOULD
> document rejection rationale.  

I'd like to hear whether folk's thoughts WGs completely ignoring
comments.  I understand that it *could* be a problem and that it could
be aggivated by a new early review scheme.  But, I am wondering whether
folks think WGs currently ignore comments they do not like without
comment.  This is different than having a discussion and then not
following the given comments.  I am talking about comments that are sent
and then completely ignored -- no discussion, no response, nothing ....
And, this is also different from any particular machinery (e.g., filing
the comments in a proper issue tracker, etc.).

Thanks!

allman


--
Mark Allman -- ICIR -- http://www.icir.org/mallman/

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email