[cdr-discuss] About the CDR process

[Pascal Costanza]

On 15 Nov 2008, at 19:32, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:

> Pascal Costanza writes:
>
>> TCR writes
>>
>>> I think a default initial period of six week is way too short. I'd
>>> suggest a period of six _months_ instead.
>>
>> The original idea when we designed CDR was that documents are already
>> publicly scrutinized elsewhere before they are submitted to CDR, so
>> the 6 weeks were targeted at last-minute changes that typically arise
>> in the last few weeks.
>
> This is what I thought. Notice, however, that submitting a CDR has the
> follow effects
>
>  a) it's announced
>
>       so people are more likely to direct their attention to such
>       a document.
>
>  b) it's _officially_ announced
>
>       so people who want to implement documents into their
>       implementation of choice, have some credited ressource
>       to point implementators at.
>
>  c) there is a public, and archived, discussion platform
>
>
> Another possibility would be to introduce a new status, "Draft", which
> takes 6 months, and precedes the "Initial" status. This seems to make
> the process unnecessarily more complex, though.

Indeed, this would make the process more complicated.

I will try and see how an 'informal' approach works out, by suggesting  
a 6 month period to submitters in case their documents haven't been  
discussed before. Maybe that already resolves the issue. Let's see how  
that works.

Anyway, thanks a lot for the feedback!

Pascal

-- 
Pascal Costanza, mailto:pc at p-cos.net, http://p-cos.net
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Programming Technology Lab
Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussel, Belgium