JMP Mail Archive: Re: JMP> Comments on JMP V0.82 from Xerox developers
Re: JMP> Comments on JMP V0.82 from Xerox developers
Tom Hastings (
hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Fri, 20 Jun 1997 17:24:07 PDT
At 16:12 06/20/97 PDT, JK Martin wrote:
>Ira,
>
>First off, it would have been nice to toss each of the 16 issues
>on the mailing list as they were identified, rather than waiting
>until the very last minute and throwing the whole lot onto the list
>as people are getting ready to fly to the PWG meetings next week.
>
>I don't think that's too much to ask, do you? Moreover, I *expressly*
>made such a comment to Tom during the JMP meeting in San Diego last
>month, strongly encouraging him to not repeat this same scenario as
>has been done so often in the past.
>
>And, by posting issues as they arise to the mailing list, you not
>only allow for interleaving of human effort, but you also satisfy
>the IETF working group rules you have referenced.
Jay,
I'm sorry that I didn't understand what you were suggesting in
San Diego. Now that you are being *specific* that you prefer to see
each issue sent as a separate mail message and sent when discovered,
instead of one week ahead of the meeting (the PWG agreed deadline),
I understand what you are saying.
Bob also mentioned to me yesterday that he preferred short mail messages
on a specific topic rather than a long list. That he tends to read
a mail message that is a screenful and postpones reading longer ones.
If others feel the same, lets change the way we work. The mail traffic
will go up...
Tom