[Tzdist] Fwd: Time Zone Distribution Protocol WG Milestones (tzdist)

[Tobias Conradi <[e-mail]>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Tzdist] Time Zone Distribution Protocol WG Milestones (tzdist)
To: Tobias Conradi <[e-mail]>
Cc: Daniel Migault <[e-mail]>


<Chair hat on>


On 8/14/14, 5:28 PM, Tobias Conradi wrote:

Eliot,

Calm down.

How did you determine I am not?


That you have argued a point that is already well understood and agreed.



Maybe you are mirroring your own feel and you are in need of calming down?

The tzdist group is not a week old.

Not news. But the topic are the drafts, not the tzdist group.


Our charter calls on us to consider draft-douglass-timezone-service-11
and draft-daboo-caldav-timezone-ref-01 as initial input to the working
group. You can expect a call for adoption of those drafts.  If you
agree, please say so.  If you have concerns, you should expect to be
asked to state them clearly.  That call for adoption will happen
shortly after we have agreed our milestones.

Once we have drafts that are adopted, they will be developed in the
working group.  You are welcome to provide whatever technical or
editorial comments you would like in a respectful way.  The chairs
will track your comments to see that they are addressed.  It is
possible that not all of your suggestions will be accepted, but all
must be addressed in order to move the documents forward.



When talking about age, the drafts exist since 2014-03-15.

The proposal to change one of them exists since

2014-07-03
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tzdist/current/msg00004.html

In the next month, if you have specific comments about the drafts that
we expect to be the output of this group, now is a good time to write
them down.

That's what I did:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tzdist/current/msg00004.html


I believe that Cyrus has already said that he would make those
modifications, and I expect him to either correct me or to make the
changes.


Further inspection is blocked by:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tzdist/current/msg00016.html

"I am one of those that don't want to spend extra time on working with
documents only because they are not updated to use current instead of
outdated terminology."


It is your choice to work on the documents or not.  We are an open
group, although as co-chair I expect all participants to engage in a
constructive manner.



Paul provided another blocking reason.
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tzdist/current/msg00015.html

So there is on the one hand:
- outdated terminology
- outdated contact info

And one may wonder what else is outdated and triggers time wasting.

On the other hand:
- no update schedule

And then people shall give feedback on milestones.

Maybe someone can tell why the drafts are not fixed? Is it difficult
to just go and publish new drafts?


Individual drafts are under control of the authors, and not this
working group.  As the authors don't work for you or for me, we should
be very careful about making demands on their time.


I only found
http://www.ietf.org/id-info/

"Internet-Drafts have no formal status, and are subject to change or
removal at any time"


That's right.  Those drafts have no status, and authors of non-WG
documents may make whatever changes they want or don't want.  We may
choose to adopt those documents as working group documents. Once the
documents are adopted by the WG, all issues must be addressed prior to
the work advancing to proposed standard.

For your information, working groups operate under the guidelines of
BCP 25.  I bring to your attention Section 3.2 of that document, part
of which reads:

   As with face-to-face sessions occasionally one or more individuals
   may engage in behavior on a mailing list which disrupts the WG's
   progress.  In these cases the Chair should attempt to discourage the
   behavior by communication directly with the offending individual
   rather than on the open mailing list.  If the behavior persists then
   the Chair must involve the Area Director in the issue.  As a last
   resort and after explicit warnings, the Area Director, with the
   approval of the IESG, may request that the mailing list maintainer
   block the ability of the offending individual to post to the mailing
   list. (If the mailing list software permits this type of operation.)
   Even if this is done, the individual must not be prevented from
   receiving messages posted to the list.  Other methods of mailing list
   control may be considered but must be approved by the AD(s) and the
   IESG.


We have already received multiple complaints about your behavior.  I
urge you please to help us with the working group and improving the
documents.  My commitment to you in return is that we will see that
each issue that you respectfully raise will be addressed.

Regards,

Eliot
<chair hat off>
(I hate wearing hats indoors)


-- 
Tobias Conradi
Rheinsberger Str. 18
10115 Berlin
Germany

http://tobiasconradi.com