[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Review of proposal: Education team

Pekka,

we're working on it.

It's no big secret that the secretariat's had troubles.
But they're trying to fix them as fast as they can - including introducing more automation.

Unfortunately, some things (like milestone date changes) don't have mechanical support, and they get delayed because they need AD approval before the secretariat does it, and that's hard to automate - but it's on the list of projects. It's a long list.

--On 30. oktober 2003 08:15 +0200 Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi> wrote:

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: 
It was intentional, and intended to provide input for tomorrow's IESG
telechat - what was not intentional was the review message coming out
this  late. We're discussing how to deal with that - it's another 3
weeks until  the next IESG telechat.

Ok.

Is it just me or does it seem like the IETF secretariat is having a lot
of  problems with its basic processes?  We're concerned over the use of
efficient engineering practices, but our support functions are failing.
Updating the WG web page or charter items in particular can take weeks,
if  done at all, Internet-Drafts get significantly delayed, bogus
draft-ietf-<WG> document get accepted as WG items by the secretariat
without asking from WG chairs by mistake, etc.etc.

There seems a lot of streamlining the process to do, making it more
automatic. (IMHO, it seems weird that something like I-D submission
is not automated..)

After that the secretariat could concentrate better on subjects which
cannot be easily automated, like writing IESG minutes.. :-)

But I'm probably not alone in wondering about this..

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings