Re: Not revisiting the RFC process (was: RFC 362...)

On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 08:31:23PM +0000, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:00:45PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> > So I ask you - *why* make an artificial deadline? What's the point?
> 
> Do you currently believe we're all sufficiently focused on getting the
> job done? I ask merely for information.

Well, no, what I'm saying is that with the lack of a formal process, people are
spinning their wheels.

I think the intent is there, the focus is there, but the process has sort of 
grinded to a halt. The current RFCs need work. There are things that could be
built (like the RFC searcher) There are new RFCs that could be written. Its 
totally counter-productive to wait and its totally-totally-counterproductive
to try to enforce some artificial deadline 4 months after it passed...

> -- 
> You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all alike.

wow. for a second I thought that that was part of the message itself. Although
I read it as 'you *are* a maze of little twisting passages' which confused
me quite a bit. I wasn't sure if it was a complement or an insult. ;-)

Ed