[rfc-i] Job description and number of hours per week

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Sun Nov 14 12:33:12 PST 2010


On 2010-11-14 16:58, Ted Hardie wrote:

<vigorous snip>

> To me, those requires domain-specific expertise.  A senior professional
> with that expertise and the appropriate charge from the community
> would be a real asset.  Shifting the responsibility for monitoring a contract
> to this job and away from the IAOC or IAD is a lot less value, frankly.
> (Contract management is, in my understanding, part of what is meant by RFC
> Editor oversight in the job description given in this doc, but that is partly
> informed by hallway conversations.  Your hallway may differ)

I've been uncomfortable since the first go-around that the RSE will be toothless
if not inserted formally between the contractors and the IAD, as far as giving
direction to the contractors is concerned. That doesn't take the responsibility
for the contract away from the IAOC, but it does imply that daily authority
should be *explicitly* delegated to the RSE. Otherwise the RSE will be
in a position of management by persuasion, which is more appropriate for our
volunteer activities.

This is not, in my mind, inconsistent with another thing you said that I
strongly agree with:

> ...that role takes policy decisions or desiderata
> from the community and provides concrete methods for how to achieve
> them--and then works with the streams to ensure that the recommendations
> actually succeed.

Actually I believe that being able to give direction to the contractors
is necessary (but not sufficient) to ensure that such recommendations
succeed.

As for the community process, and how the committee presently called the
RSAG relates to that, I think that still needs more work and I hope
we'll see something more satisfactory in the next draft. As I said in a
previous note, "the current membership of the RSAG is a bit of a by-product
of history and there's scope for reviewing it." In case that's unclear,
I for one will be happy to step down from the RSAG if the new model requires
it.

    Brian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list