Replaced /idtracker/help/evaluation/ with redirect to www.ietf.org
- Legacy-Id: 2177
This commit is contained in:
Pasi Eronen
parent
808468ca7e
commit
fbb1389ebf
|
|
@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ from django.views.generic.simple import redirect_to
|
|||
|
||||
urlpatterns = patterns('django.views.generic.simple',
|
||||
(r'^help/state/$', 'direct_to_template', { 'template': 'idtracker/states.html', 'extra_context': { 'states': IDState.objects.all(), 'substates': IDSubState.objects.all() } }),
|
||||
(r'^help/evaluation/$', 'direct_to_template', { 'template': 'idtracker/view_evaluation_desc.html' }),
|
||||
(r'^help/evaluation/$', redirect_to, {'url':'http://www.ietf.org/iesg/voting-procedures.html' }),
|
||||
)
|
||||
urlpatterns += patterns('',
|
||||
(r'^status/$', views.status),
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,100 +0,0 @@
|
|||
{% extends "idrfc/base.html" %}
|
||||
{# Copyright The IETF Trust 2007, All Rights Reserved #}
|
||||
|
||||
{% block content %}
|
||||
<h1>Explanation of Discusses</h1>
|
||||
<pre>
|
||||
The process that the IESG uses for recording and documenting issues
|
||||
with documents is called an Evaluation. Evaluations provide a
|
||||
mechanism for ensuring that each AD has the opportunity to review each
|
||||
document and to keep track of who has (and has not) yet completed an
|
||||
evaluation for a particular document.
|
||||
|
||||
The ballot options for all normal evaluations are:
|
||||
|
||||
- "Yes" means "I read it, I think it's good stuff, make it so."
|
||||
|
||||
- "No Objection" means "I would not object if this document went forward".
|
||||
|
||||
examples where No Objection might be used include:
|
||||
- I read it & have no problem with it
|
||||
- I read the protocol action & trust the AD so have no problem
|
||||
- I listened to the discussion and have no problem
|
||||
|
||||
This may be interpreted as "I have no clue or have no cycles",
|
||||
in that you exercise the ability to move a document forward on the
|
||||
basis of trust towards the other ADs
|
||||
|
||||
- "Discuss" means "I cannot in good conscience send this document forward,
|
||||
but if it were fixed in these ways, I would change my vote to 'yes' or no
|
||||
objection'", or it may literally mean "I think we need to talk about this."
|
||||
|
||||
Text explaining the "discuss" must be written at the time that the "discuss"
|
||||
is placed, saved in the tracker, and sent by email to all affected parties
|
||||
(at least the IESG, the document shepherd, and the document author(s), and quite
|
||||
likely the WG too).
|
||||
|
||||
Valid criteria for a "discuss" are documented separately.
|
||||
|
||||
A "discuss" is not intended to be a blocking tactic, but a way to
|
||||
cause significant improvement in a draft. If we have a legitimate
|
||||
issue with a draft, we should return the document to the working
|
||||
group (or author) for resolution of the problem as quickly as possible.
|
||||
If an AD cannot get cooperation from the working group and cannot vote to
|
||||
send a document forward, he or she should switch to "abstain".
|
||||
|
||||
- "Abstain" means "I cannot vote to send this document forward."
|
||||
There are two obvious reasons one might vote this way:
|
||||
- so strongly opposed to document that I am unwilling to "discuss".
|
||||
(note that this should be very unusual)
|
||||
- I oppose this document for some philosophical reason but
|
||||
understand that others differ and am not going to stand
|
||||
in the way of the others
|
||||
|
||||
- "Recuse" means "I cannot vote due to a personal interest in the document"
|
||||
The AD is a document author, working group chair, or otherwise
|
||||
interested party
|
||||
|
||||
- "Defer" - give me a stated amount of time - one telechat cycle, two
|
||||
with the consent of the chair - to read the document. Other discussion
|
||||
may and presumably will continue, but no decision will be reached until
|
||||
the agreed time has elapsed or the requesters have all changed their
|
||||
votes, whichever happens earlier. "Defer" should be avoided as much as
|
||||
possible.
|
||||
|
||||
It takes one "yes", with at least 2/3 of all non-recused ADs voting "yes" or
|
||||
"no objection", and no "discuss" votes to move a document forward.
|
||||
|
||||
The IESG secretary will refer to the ballot during the telechat, and poll
|
||||
anyone who has not recorded an opinion. This is somewhat time consuming. It
|
||||
is much better to enter your ballot in advance, and circulate important
|
||||
comments and "Discuss" text in advance. If a Discuss can be cleared by email
|
||||
before the telechat, everybody wins. During the telechat, the secretary will
|
||||
tally the scores and announce the result, leaving us more time for the
|
||||
knottier issues or (yes, it has happened) the ability to end the call early.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternative procedure, invoked by the chair in the event that the IESG
|
||||
deadlocks in the above process:
|
||||
|
||||
- all ADs must read the document by a time stated.
|
||||
- the vote is up-down -
|
||||
"yes" means "I read it and it is good stuff"
|
||||
"no" means "I read it and it is not good stuff"
|
||||
"abstain" means "I read it but I do not feel qualified to comment
|
||||
"recused" is as above
|
||||
|
||||
In this case, 2/3 of all non-recused ADs must vote "yes" and not more than two ADs may
|
||||
vote "no". Continued deadlock sends it back to the working group.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
</pre>
|
||||
<form action=".">
|
||||
<input type="button" value="Back" onClick="history.go(-1);"/>
|
||||
</form>
|
||||
|
||||
{% endblock %}
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue