[rfc-i] Five-author maximum?
mallman at icir.org
Thu Jun 10 09:32:17 PDT 2004
> This seems to bust the five-authors suggestion by a significant
> number. Are each of these people really responsible for all of the
> content? Given Phil's designation as "Ed." on the top line, it seems
> likely that the author-name-padding should be removed.
Let me take a swing at this.
I editted this document, as well. I took over from Phil for the final
push. I was offered a spot on the author list and turned it down. This
document was started before the 5-author limit was imposed. The folks
(and more) on the current author list were all listed because they
contributed lots of text and expertise. This is a big document and no
one person had the required set of expertise to author it alone. When
the 5-author limit was imposed the list was scaled back to just Phil.
However, when we were preparing the last version of the document that
felt all wrong. The people on the current author list had contributed
substantially. And, it wasn't clear that we could pick 4 (besides Phil)
who clearly contributed more than folks who would then have to be left
off. In the 5-author policy there is a bit of wiggle room and an appeal
was sent to Harald (and the IESG maybe) who seemed fine with wiggling in
this particular case -- i.e., it wasn't an oversight, it was an explicit
decision. That's the story.
We might reasonably disagree whether it should be Phil or Phil+everyone
else, or about the general policy, or whatever. **However**, I
completely **reject** the notion that this document is "padded" with
authors. If one were to look at the record from the PILC WG, I think
one would see that all these folks made a substanative contribution.
Further, this was an explicit decision not an oversight. Sorry for
being a bit sensative here, but simply counting authors and suggesting
author padding without attempting to understand the context and the
process that was used to arrive at the author list slights these folk's
Mark Allman -- ICIR -- http://www.icir.org/mallman/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20040610/74c6f8a8/attachment.bin
More information about the rfc-interest