Re: maintenance process

[Marek Hajduczenia <marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx>]

Raz,

I think that step represents precisely what you're asking for - the step of "Modify resolution" implies any process(es) we typically use to reach consensus, including discussions between the task force and the submitter (via email, phone, etc.). As a side note, a submitter is always encouraged to participate in the MR resolution to make sure that the feedback and discussions are all done in a timely manner.

Once the MR is moved to the "Ready for Ballot" status, at least 2/3 of the Task Force have been satisfied and I believe there is no need for further "negotiation" with the submitter - the MR will be then balloted, where individual have another shot at the MR, suggesting any changes they might deem necessary.

I think we are good as shown today

Thanks for looking at it

Marek

On 4 September 2014 01:34, Raz Gabe <Raz.Gabe@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks Glen,

Looks OK from my point of view with one comment.

I think that there should be an option of negotiation/approval between the committee and the submitter.

·         At the step

·         And also at the last steps after modified/revised:

 

Rgrds

--Raz

 

From: stds-1904-wg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:stds-1904-wg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Glen Kramer
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 3:37 AM
To: STDS-1904-WG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: maintenance process

 

Dear colleagues,

 

At the last meeting, I took an action item to revise the maintenance process to decouple handling of maintenance requests and balloting on draft standard.

Attached please, see the proposed maintenance process diagram. Please, let me know if you have any feedback.

 

Thank you,

Glen