Re: WG Charter Milestones

[Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]>]

On Jun 21, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:

> Updating dates of milestones or which wg drafts are associated with a milestone seems like a great thing for the chairs to do. 
> 
> However, I am not in favor of chairs adding new milestones, or changing the text of existing ones, without AD approval. The WG will make the chair do whatever they hum on, most WGs will hum yes to close every milestone proposed - the net effect with be a loss of any sense of focus in the WG and a peanut butter effect to spreading the energy so thin that each WG milestone takes longer than it currently takes. My view of one of the largest problems at the IETF is that things take too long - adding more milestones will not help.
> 
> One of the jobs of the AD is to help prioritize work in an area and get stuff moving. Adding milestones are one of one of the few tools they have to do it. Trying to delegate this to the chairs won't work because the chairs will end up directly or indirectly bound to the hums. If the area disagrees with the ADs prioritization, it's time for a new AD. 
> 
> Not to mention the issue of things like the codecs wg chairs might go and add a milestone for a video codec which I 'm sure would create a lot of excitement for the IESG :-) 

FWIW, the wording from draft-ietf-genarea-milestones-tool-01 is:

   The responsible AD for a WG can specify whether any of the following
   actions can be made without the AD approval for milestones associated
   with the WG:

   o  create new milestones

   o  delete milestones

   o  change milestone descriptions

   o  change milestone due dates

   o  change which Internet-Drafts are associated with a milestone

   o  assert that a milestone is completed

   The default settings at the time that this feature is launched will
   be that all actions other than changing due dates and asserting
   completion require AD approval.  These settings apply both to
   additions and changes made by WG chairs and by other ADs.

That means that the default settings match your proposal above, but allow the AD to let the WG chairs to create peanut butter on a WG-by-WG basis. Note that the AD will be informed of each change, regardless of whether or not the WG chair needed AD approval.

Discussion of this proposed text is heartily welcomed.

--Paul Hoffman