Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Alexey Melnikov via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:56:08 -0700

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

**********************************************************************
* Note, that I am conducting an experiment when people aspiring to be*
* Area Directors get exposed to AD work ("AD shadowing experiment"). *
* As a part of this experiment they get to review documents on IESG  *
* telechats according to IESG Discuss criteria document and their    *
* comments get relayed pretty much verbatim to relevant editors/WGs. *
* As an AD I retain responsibility in defending their position when  *
* I agree with it.                                                   *
* Recipients of these reviews are encouraged to reply to me directly *
* about perceived successes or failures of this experiment.          *
**********************************************************************

The following comments were provided by Francesca Palombini
<[email-masked]>.

Francesca would have balloted *No Objections* on this document. She wrote:

Comment:

This draft is informational, but does put up requirements on IETF Secretariat
and tools team in order for readers to follow its possible use (develop certain
features, add certain tasks to IETF Secretariat). I see this draft as both a
wish list (valid at this point in time) and a guideline. If it would contain
only the possible guideline, I would understand that publishing it would have
value, but as it is I am not sure: what does publishing it add to having the
draft itself?