RE: reviewer guidelines

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

We should NOT go overboard with the reviewer guidelines.

My intention with this document would be to achieve
- get consistency in MIB review by MIB Doctors
- let people know what the most common issues are that we
  see when reviewing documents, so that they can try to
  address them before we review.
- Try to clarify/defuse some of the CLRs that have troubled
  people and try to get a consistent/agreed-to position
  from the MIB doctors.

The discussion on the below seems to go overboard w.r.t. this
documents goals. If the doc gets too big/long/extensive,
then people will not even take the time to read it.

Just my opinion.

Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. M. Heard [mailto:heard@pobox.com]
> Sent: woensdag 22 januari 2003 6:13
> To: Mreview (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: reviewer guidelines
> 
> 
> On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> > The note needs to be addressed to the folks writing the code to
> > import the MIB modules.  If the import code and database design
> > can't cope with stuff outside 1.3.6.1, warnings in the MIB modules
> > themselves will be too late to do any good.
> 
> My point exactly.
> 
> //cmh
> 
>