Re: Almost certainly (was Re: [Pesci-discuss] Finding and nurturing the bright sparks of genius)

Another point to consider is whether we did the right thing in
pushing the laundry list of raw principles off into an Appendix.
But we do need to be very clear about separating basic, unchanging
principles from the specific principles for change. Maybe the basics
should be spun off as a completely separate item of work?

    Brian

Scott W Brim wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 06:08:07AM -0700, Spencer Dawkins allegedly
> wrote:
> 
>>Thre PESCI team has many people that I like AND respect on it, but
>>whaever the current draft says, the IETF does NOT have 30-something
>>principles.
> 
> 
> Good, we've got you thinking about it.  In order to discuss processes
> for process change, we have to agree on core principles, and not take
> short cuts on doing so. 
> 
> 
>>My suggestion, based on not a lot of sleep or thought, is that the
>>BOF focus on getting community feedback on what the principles are,
>>and the list of 30-something is a reasonable starting point to
>>winnow from.
> 
> 
> I'd prefer doing *most* of this via mail (i.e. some can be done in the
> BOF but just to get it moving).  It *should* be a long discussion, and
> participants should think and feel deeply between comments.  
> 
> 
>>I can say this on this list, on the IETF list, at the BOF, or at the
>>plenary, but whatever else we need between Vancouver and Dallas for
>>process evolution to move forward, we need to know those principles.
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> swb
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pesci-discuss mailing list
> Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss
> 

_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss