> I think it would be a step in the right direction if the WG chairs > actually required RFC authors to maintain their RFCs. I also think it would be a step in the right direction if the WG chairs wrote up summaries like they said they would. They obviously don't. Frankly, I don't really see what the WG chairs are for, unless maybe it's to play list mom.
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Implement... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... John Porter
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... John Porter
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: What good are WG chairs? Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: What good are WG chairs? Russ Allbery
- Re: What good are WG chairs? Nathan Wiger
- Seems to me that -- Mike Lacey
- Re: Seems to me that -- Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Imple... Adam Turoff
- Update: Wrapping up -data RFC... Jeremy Howard
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Implementations - Seperating th... skud
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Implementations - Seperating th... skud
- Re: RFC - Prototype RFC Implementations - Seperati... Michael G Schwern