Re: Support (as co-author)

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Sat, 30 November 2019 05:59 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDE1612011E for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 21:59:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a1TtcZ3qKJ8g for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 21:59:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAB9F120044 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 21:59:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.12] (unknown [119.94.163.250]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F127A35DF54; Sat, 30 Nov 2019 06:59:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: Support (as co-author)
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Cc: WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
References: <5871efb6-9fa7-a06a-e201-fb9fba04935e@cisco.com> <52E68411-998E-46D3-8F05-F5EA41C102B4@gmail.com>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <491a2421-5082-06d1-8945-7f3e66185644@pi.nu>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 13:59:13 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <52E68411-998E-46D3-8F05-F5EA41C102B4@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/8tyY-bVEENiwMRNmIWrGcir8beA>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 05:59:24 -0000

Bod,

very much agree!

small cooment and a piece of one of my favorite rants inline.

On 27/11/2019 00:31, Bob Hinden wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> My take on this is that having one’s name as an author is implicitly a sign of support.

Well - I would say that it very explicit.

> No need to state it on the list in an adoption call.   

I'd say that this is obvious. BTW I'm still waiting for the case where
an author at the WGAP says he no long support the document.


> If you don’t support it, you should ask that your name be removed.

Well - yes, but if you still have contributed text to the document, you
will still have to active for the IPT polls.

> 
> Isn’t this the reason we see drafts with long author lists?
> 
> Relating to this, I think that someone should only be listed as an author if they have written words in the document.   I dislike the trend to listing names of people as authors who have not contributed to the text.

I think the rules would be

If you are an authors - you thave contributed text or at least ideas
to the document -  you should be listed as an author. Eve it this takes
us 6 or 7 authors.

As it is now it happens that wg chairs are forced to move authors - text
in the document - to become a contributor. having to explain why one
author should be on the front page, while other are stowed away in the
contributor section.

/Loa
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
>> On Nov 25, 2019, at 7:09 AM, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Along the years, I witnessed a trend, which intensifies with time: "I support the adoption of this draft (as a co-author)."
>> Well, if someone is a co-author, implicitly this person wants the draft to progress. Therefore, such as message carries no weight IMO.
>> Is it time for the WG chairs to start correcting this behaviour, or at least setting the right expectations?
>>
>> ex: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/?q=Adoption%20Call%20for%20draft-ioamteam-ippm-ioam-direct-export
>>
>> Regards, Benoit
>>
>>
>>
> 

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
Senior MPLS Expert
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64