Re: [Rfced-future] Welcome to the romp! A reminder of what I would like us to decide first...

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 01/04/2020 07:34, Eliot Lear wrote:
> 
> Should the program worry about the structure of the series or should
> the program worry about putting in place someone who could lead the
> community in worrying about the structure of the series (among other
> things)?

I think the focus ought be on the latter, or more precisely
on defining that role and it's accompanying setup rather
than on the direct "putting in place" of a person to fill
the role. I hope this process produces an accepted method
for the "putting in place" bit but doesn't aim to actually
run the hiring process;-)

> A related question:
> 
> Should we establish a process that addresses series evolution over
> time or should we leave that for later?
Personally, I think we ought keep in mind that we are
dealing with a 50-year old artefact (the series) that I at
least would like to see setup so it could continue for
another 50 years, should the content of RFCs in the series
continue to be relevant. 50 years is too far into the
future to be fair, but I'd like us to aim to set things
up so that could happen and I figure that means we need
to define the RSE role with that in mind. Concretely, I
think that implies some level of independence from IETF
process-change may be needed for the RSE - but I don't
claim to know how that might best be done.

Cheers,
S.