Re: Fix made to https://chairs.ietf.org/en/documents/document-shepherding

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

Hi Toreless,

Thanks for both good comments.  based on both comments, does anyone 
object to the following (I can do the wiki update once we close on the 
discussion):

      Per 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-statement-on-document-shepherds-20101011/,
     the IESG encourages the working group chair to select an
     active working group participant that has strong understanding of
     the document content, is familiar with the document history, and
     is familiar with the IETF standards process. The Document Shepherd
     of a working group document should not be an author or editor of
     the document.

     Some working groups also avoid appointing Shepherds who are
     affiliated with an author or editor of the document. Affiliation
     should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, e.g., individuals in
     different divisions of a large company  may be considered to have
     sufficient independence to permit a  Shepherd and a author from
     the same company on the same document.

Thanks,

Lou

On 11/4/2024 10:23 AM, Toerless Eckert wrote:
 > On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 03:10:22PM +0000, Lou Berger wrote:
 >> In some of my working groups we recuse a co-chair from the Shepherd  
role
 >> when that chair is from the same company as any author or editor 
(but not
 >> contributor). My questions are:
 >> 1) Do others follow this same practice in their groups?
 >>
 >> 2) I think the same policy should be applied to non-Chair Shepherds, 
do you
 >> agree or disagree?
 >
 > In general, that type of "independence" is a good weighing factor in 
deciding
 > on a Shepherd, but its really only weighing IMHO.
 >
 > We had a case, where the Shepherd was from the same company as some 
co-authors,
 > but came from a quite different department and had a good amount of 
more experience
 > primarily with IETF processes, but also likely some technology. When 
discussing
 > this, we chairs also felt that being from the same company allowed 
him to spend more time
 > on the review than might have been possible for other reviewers. And 
indeed that
 > was used excessivel to improve the text quality. And us chairs
 > also felt that there wher no technical conflict points in the WG and 
there where/are
 > enough other independent reviews that it was not necessary to select 
a shepherd
 > more on independence than those other beneficial technical criteria.
 >
 > Maybe in general: These type of decisions will have to be quite 
different based on the
 > degree of differences of opinion about a draft in the WG. If the 
overwhelming
 > feeling is that the WG wants this to be as good as possible and there 
are no
 > specific affiliation based conflicts, then it's a lot less important to
 > weigh independence higher than other factors.
 >
 > Cheers
 >     Toerless
 >
 >> Thanks,
 >>
 >> Lou
 >>
 >>
 >> On 11/4/2024 9:46 AM, Lou Berger wrote:
 >>> Hi,
 >>>
 >>> I'm not sure who is the authoritative owner/source to the "IETF Chairs
 >>> Resources" but there was an error on
 >>> https://chairs.ietf.org/en/documents/document-shepherding - that I just
 >>> fixed.  The text now say:
 >>>
 >>>     It is encouraged for a Shepherd to not be a Chair of the working
 >>>     group.  The Shepherd should have strong understanding of the
 >>>     document content, is familiar with the document history, and is
 >>>     familiar with the IETF standards process. The Document Shepherd of
 >>>     a working group document should not be an author or editor of the
 >>>     document.
 >>>
 >>> Which is based on the IESG statement 
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-statement-on-document-shepherds-20101011/)
 >>>
 >>>     In fact, the IESG encourages the working group chair to select an
 >>>     active working group participant that has strong understanding of
 >>>     the document content, is familiar with the document history, and
 >>>     is familiar with the IETF standards process. The Document Shepherd
 >>>     of a working group document should not be an author or editor of
 >>>     the document.
 >>>
 >>> The page previously said:
 >>>
 >>>     It is considered generally preferable for a Shepherd to not be a
 >>>     Chair of the working group,
 >>>      or from the same organization/company as the Chair.
 >>>
 >>> I figured others may be interested in this change, or maybe even 
want to
 >>> disagree with it.
 >>>
 >>> Lou
 >>>
 >>>
 >