[rfc-i] Comparatively minor questions on the motivations
dthaler at microsoft.com
Tue Dec 21 12:52:43 PST 2010
I just finished reading the motivations document, and have some additional
clarifying questions, which are minor compared to the questions Olaf and Ted
1) A half-time appointment would presumably lead to the RSE having something
else for the other half-time. However, Section 2 states "This person must
have no other interests." Can you clarify to reconcile these two statements?
2) I still find it confusing as to what "consent" of the REOC really means in
practice, in this proposed model. What happens if they don't consent, or
if they have no consensus on whether they consent? (This is actually more
a comment on the model than on the motivations, but the motivations
discusses it and doesn't answer it for me.)
3) I found Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.5 (and to some extend 3.2.1) to be confusing,
arguably contradictory, with respect to whose job it would be, in your
recommendations, to lead various review meetings.
BTW, I found the motivations draft far more clear than the model draft
on what your recommendation is for the RSAG. This at least answered
my confusion on that point.
More information about the rfc-interest