Greetings. Before Alexis and I start our review, I have a significant procedural question. In <https://github.com/rfc-editor/AUTH48-rfc9920/pull/1>, Eliot (I assume wearing his shepherd hat) proposes a significant policy change be added to the document during AUTH48 without asking the RSWG. He does not give specific text, just a "very loose strawman".
I'm not being hyperbolic here: I find this horrifying, regardless of the result. For starters, the discussion of whether to even add this text will not appear in auth48archive, so someone who later wants to know how this got added would have to look in the pull requests. We are now seeing GitHub limiting the number of requests someone can make to look at issues and PRs, so this searching could easily lead to frustration. A fundamental question: should the fact that this document is going through on GitHub prevent significant discussion from appearing in the auth48archive@? As to the issue itself: as co-author, I believe that Eliot needs to bring this significant proposed change to the RSWG and that we not finish processing the document until there is RSWG consensus. I feel that way about every significant proposed change in every AUTH48, but I'm particularly concerned with a policy change that refers to a draft that is not even in the RFC Editor's queue. --Paul Hoffman -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
