On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 8/23/2013 11:06 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
>
>> We don't have to be like the ones we all know who sneer at anyone
>> presuming to get in the way of their code going into production.
>>
>
>
> Since this is such a fundamental point, I'm sending t
Hi Dave,
I read the messages on this thread. I suggested to the participant
to comment. I am okay with the comments which were made. I had an
off-list exchange before the message that generated the other
thread. The exchange was not antagonistic.
Some people read "please read the archive
Dave Crocker wrote:
On 8/23/2013 11:06 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
We don't have to be like the ones we all know who sneer at anyone
presuming to get in the way of their code going into production.
Since this is such a fundamental point, I'm sending this reply to
emphasize:
The concern I exp
On 8/23/2013 11:06 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
We don't have to be like the ones we all know who sneer at anyone
presuming to get in the way of their code going into production.
Since this is such a fundamental point, I'm sending this reply to emphasize:
The concern I expressed had nothing at al
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> In pragmatic terms, the current operational model for a LC (and IESG)
> review tends to enforce no rules or limits to what can be challenged or
> suggested, while simultaneously expecting those who have been doing the
> work to then be respo
On 23 Aug 2013 04:22, wrote:
>
> > LC should not be treated as a right of passage, to test the patience of
> > folks who have developed a document.
>
> rite?
>
Right - right or rite?
> Lloyd Wood
> http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/
>
>
> LC should not be treated as a right of passage, to test the patience of
> folks who have developed a document.
rite?
Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/
Pete, et al,
On 8/22/2013 7:22 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:
So, now at the point of IETF LC, the correct thing to happen is to
let folks make their objections, point them to places in the prior
conversation where the WG, the chairs, the ADs, and assorted other
folks became convinced, and see if thei