Re: Changes needed to Last Call boilerplate

jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Fri, 13 February 2009 03:38 UTC

Return-Path: <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B87013A6BAF for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:38:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1KBU85mLzFsa for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:38:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C54E33A6A9E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:38:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 11178) id B49D36BE55A; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:39:01 -0500 (EST)
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Changes needed to Last Call boilerplate
Message-Id: <20090213033901.B49D36BE55A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:39:01 -0500
From: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Cc: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 03:38:59 -0000

    > From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>

    > it's really important that the Subject contains the draft name.
    > Otherwise, sorting becomes a nightmare.
    > ...
    > The radical alternative is of course a web-based method which ensures
    > that comments are logged and stored per-document

I think these (and the per-draft mailboxes others have mentioned) are probably
all steps in a long-term plan, with the eventual optimum system being the
web-based thing you mention.

But please, let's not wait until we have something 'really good' working.
Let's move _right away_ to the simplest, fastest, easiest improvement on plain
old "ietf@ietf.org", i.e. "ietf-comments"; as soon as Subject: line tagging is
working (that works now with mailto:, right?), add that, then when separate
mailboxes are ready, add them, etc, etc.

	Noel