From nobody Tue Apr 21 10:46:47 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dir-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dir-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C3E1B2A0B for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 10:46:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gm8GkRB7sHyo for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 10:46:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC5E21B2A07 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 10:46:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unnumerable.local (pool-71-170-237-80.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [71.170.237.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.1/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t3LHkbGt064872 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:46:37 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host pool-71-170-237-80.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [71.170.237.80] claimed to be unnumerable.local Message-ID: <55368CF8.50603@nostrum.com> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:46:32 -0500 From: Robert Sparks User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Farrell , dir-coord@ietf.org References: <54DA39DD.8010702@nostrum.com> <54DAA4CE.3020306@cs.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <54DAA4CE.3020306@cs.tcd.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dir-coord] Review tracking requirements draft X-BeenThere: dir-coord@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is an e-mail alias for the organisers of IETF directorates." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 17:46:46 -0000 On 2/10/15 6:39 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Looks good, some minor comments: > > #1 I'm not sure about this bit... > > " > - The tool should allow the reviewer to enter the review into the > tool via a web form. The tool will ensure the review is posted > to the appropriate lists, and will construct the links to those > posts in the archives. > " > > The IESG debate where to send things now and then as do secdir and > different folks have different reasonable opinions so automating > the To/Cc lists for reviews may not be the best plan for now. Understood, but I do think we want (typically) the team's email list informed at least. There's no reason that the configuration for all teams needs to be the same, and we should make it so that the configuration is easy to change. > > #2 Some documents should not be reviewed. For example we used see > secdir review assignments for IRTF documents. The set of things that > are/are-not reviewed might change over time. Could be worth noting > that. I've captured a similar comment from David Black > > #3 Maybe there should be an "Other" ReviewResultName - people don't > always find choosing from the set you list that easy I think. The nice thing about this is that it's not something we have to specify as part of the code. If a team needs an "Other" its something we can add as data at any time. > > #4 Many academic conference review tools allow a reviewer to pass > on the review (usually to a poor student:-) and to ack that person > in the review text, even if that's posted by the assigned reviewer. > Not sure if we'd like that. I don't think we need it given our current notion of a review team. We'd just put the poor student on the team, no? > > Cheers, > S. > > > On 10/02/15 17:03, Robert Sparks wrote: >> All - >> >> Tero and I have a start on a draft of requirements for the evolution of >> the review tracking tool. >> Please see >> >> >> If you have a team that should be added to the block in the >> introduction, please let us know (and if you have them, send us links >> similar what the draft currently reference for gen-art and secdir). >> >> Please let us know if we've missed something that's important to you. >> If it's appropriate for your review teams, ask them to comment as well. >> >> Thanks in advance for any time you can spend helping identify how we can >> make things better. >> >> RjS >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dir-coord mailing list >> dir-coord@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dir-coord From nobody Tue Apr 21 12:42:25 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dir-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dir-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8BE81B2AE2 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:42:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jf1_0AqF8IV6 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:42:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C6671B2ADF for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:42:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81CCEBED6; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:42:19 +0100 (IST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Oj9GpLASUZFr; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:42:18 +0100 (IST) Received: from [10.87.48.73] (unknown [86.46.17.62]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7BD9DBED0; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:42:18 +0100 (IST) Message-ID: <5536A81A.2090206@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:42:18 +0100 From: Stephen Farrell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Sparks , dir-coord@ietf.org References: <54DA39DD.8010702@nostrum.com> <54DAA4CE.3020306@cs.tcd.ie> <55368CF8.50603@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: <55368CF8.50603@nostrum.com> OpenPGP: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dir-coord] Review tracking requirements draft X-BeenThere: dir-coord@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is an e-mail alias for the organisers of IETF directorates." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 19:42:23 -0000 Hiya, All those responses are fine. Just one comment. On 21/04/15 18:46, Robert Sparks wrote: >> > I don't think we need it given our current notion of a review team. > We'd just put the poor student on the team, no? If we wanted this concept, (which I doubt) then probably not. The usual case in academia would be a prof who delegates to a student with specific expertise, but the same student probably won't get another paper for a long time so wouldn't be added to the roster, e.g. for secdir. But that can all be handled via text, so it's not a deal. S. From nobody Fri Apr 24 10:05:37 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dir-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dir-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C4121B37C4 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 10:05:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W44wLm8fK4vT for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 10:05:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 557CA1B37A9 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 10:05:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unnumerable.local (pool-71-170-237-80.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [71.170.237.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.1/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t3OH5S0m036355 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 12:05:29 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host pool-71-170-237-80.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [71.170.237.80] claimed to be unnumerable.local Message-ID: <553A77D3.10900@nostrum.com> Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 12:05:23 -0500 From: Robert Sparks User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dir-coord@ietf.org References: <20150424164921.3037.50557.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20150424164921.3037.50557.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20150424164921.3037.50557.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040907020707050401060100" Archived-At: Subject: [dir-coord] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01.txt X-BeenThere: dir-coord@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is an e-mail alias for the organisers of IETF directorates." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 17:05:33 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040907020707050401060100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please pass my thanks to each of the directorates that have commented on this draft so far. I'd appreciate if you let them know about this new version, and ask that they send any new comments to tools-discuss@ietf.org. RjS -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01.txt Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 09:49:21 -0700 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Tero Kivinen , Robert Sparks , Tero Kivinen , Robert Sparks A new version of I-D, draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Robert Sparks and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker Revision: 01 Title: Tracking Reviews of Documents Document date: 2015-04-24 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 16 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker/ Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01 Diff: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01 Abstract: Several review teams ensure specific types of review are performed on Internet-Drafts as they progress towards becoming RFCs. The tools used by these teams to assign and track reviews would benefit from tighter integration to the Datatracker. This document discusses requirements for improving those tools without disrupting current work flows. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat --------------040907020707050401060100 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please pass my thanks to each of the directorates that have commented on this draft so far.
I'd appreciate if you let them know about this new version, and ask that they send any new comments to tools-discuss@ietf.org.

RjS

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01.txt
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 09:49:21 -0700
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>, Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> 


A new version of I-D, draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01.txt
has been successfully submitted by Robert Sparks and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:		draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker
Revision:	01
Title:		Tracking Reviews of Documents
Document date:	2015-04-24
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		16
URL:            http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker/
Htmlized:       http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01
Diff:           http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-sparks-genarea-review-tracker-01

Abstract:
   Several review teams ensure specific types of review are performed on
   Internet-Drafts as they progress towards becoming RFCs.  The tools
   used by these teams to assign and track reviews would benefit from
   tighter integration to the Datatracker.  This document discusses
   requirements for improving those tools without disrupting current
   work flows.

                                                                                  


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat


--------------040907020707050401060100--