Re: Idea for a process experiment to reward running code...

[Melinda Shore <[e-mail]>]

On 12/1/12 11:36 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> What actual problem is this trying to solve?  I see the reference to a
> 'reward', but wasn't aware that there is a perceived problem needing
> incentive to solve.

I gather this is one of those "everybody knows" problems, where
"everybody knows" that it takes what's perceived as too long to
get documents through the post-wglc/pre-publication process.  I
can see some value in parallelizing some processes.  I'd really
like to see AD review happen in parallel with working group last
call but I'm not sure that's possible given the already considerable
area direct workload.

There's probably some sort of sympathetic vibe running between
this document and recent discussion of nearly-cooked work being
brought to the IETF for standardization.  I think some sort of
variation on what Stephen's proposing is probably reasonable.
If somebody hasn't already documented how long it takes to get
through the various steps once a document is into wglc, it
would be worthwhile to start taking notes.

Melinda