Re: the issue with AD-shepherded individual documents

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>]

the reason for me discovering it is that I need the words to plug into the 
IESG charter, which I'm ready to make a revised version of.
(see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/charter-02-comments.txt for the writeup 
of the comments to date)

one point is that it should describe the practice as it *has* been, not how 
we want it to be, to fit with the rest of the charter.

but it's too late to ask for this on the current telechat agenda. I'll 
generate a new email with the wording alternatives we have, and send that 
out tomorrow. We'll decide on email.

                  Harald

--On onsdag, mai 28, 2003 09:54:44 -0400 Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> 
wrote:

> > I remember that we discussed this quite recently.
> :-)
>
> > I also believe that we made a decision on how we wanted this process to
> > be  described (out of proposals from me and ted, at least).
> Ted had a wording proposal May 14.
>
>   Subject: Re: experimental/info process text in IESG charter
>
> No followup (I'm guilty here too).
>
> John brought this up on poised (?) and I feel like I owe a response
> (no one else has yet), but so many messages...
>
>   Subject: Comments on section 5.2.2 of IESG charter
>
> > But I can't remember what the decision was.....
> Still open.
>
> Thomas