Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Stewart,

On 2015-06-03 11:52, Stewart Bryant wrote:
> On 02/06/2015 23:57, Ted Lemon wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 2015, at 5:57 PM, John Levine <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> Considering that most of these situations appear to be mistakes, why
>>> should correcting this mistake be more humiliating than correcting the
>>> zillions of other mistakes fixed from one version of an I-D to the
>>> next?
>> How can one possibly add an author accidentally?
>>
>>
> Well there can be a cut and paste error in the document?
>
> I am sure many drafts start life as the re-incarnation of
> an earlier work, in which case such oversight is easy. Certainly
> all my drafts are traceable to one I wrote many years ago.
>
> Then there is the possibility of mistaken identity or memory
> failure in trying to remember who was in the huddle
> at IETF when it was agreed that a draft would be written.
>
> - Stewart

I can understand about the cut-n-past, but I don't understand why this
is not captured very early in the process, e.g. when first posting the
draft. At least some steps, e.g. posting the first version of the wg
draft sends mail to all authors, also changing state in the data
tracker do that.

/Loa
>

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: [phone]