Re: [draft-melnikov-sieve-external-lists] 2.4 Proposed Error Handling Clarifications

[Cyrus Daboo <[e-mail]>]

Hi Robert,

--On July 31, 2009 10:07:06 AM +0100 Robert Burrell Donkin 
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>> I'm sure there will be a summary in the WG minutes, when they're done.
>
> i'm sure that there will
>
> it would have been polite to inform the mailing list that changes - of
> a fundamental nature - had been agreed at the meeting, and that any
> discussions on - or analysis of - the recently posted draft 00 would
> be wasted

Note that an agenda for the meeting was posted to the list in the week 
prior to the meeting for feedback and to give participants a heads-up on 
what is going to be discussed. Minutes for the meeting will be available in 
the next few weeks. In the meantime there are jabber logs and audio 
recordings that can be used to check on what happened.

In general I would suggest that if you do plan a detailed review of a 
document (not prompted by say a WG last call), that it makes sense to first 
contact the authors either directly or via the list to check on the status 
of the document to make sure there are no queued up changes that may be of 
significance. That is certainly advisable at around the time of an IETF 
meeting where drafts are often updated.

In any case, your feedback on this and other documents is appreciated. If 
you do think that changes to the WG process are needed, it would probably 
be best to bring that up on the general IETF discussion list or the apps 
area list as I don't think this WG behaves much differently from many 
others.

-- 
Cyrus Daboo