[CWG-Stewardship] verification function
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Wed Feb 11 05:34:58 UTC 2015
Dear colleagues,
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:28:32AM +0800, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> I think either way the need for external audit could be an overkill, as
> described by Lisse and the NTIA rep during the session;
I agree. It seems to me that the verifications step as it exists
today could nearly be performed by a small shell script, and
perhaps what we ought to do is figure out what parts cannot be and
suggest that people figure out a way to automate those too.
Best regards,
Andrew
(PS: yes, I'm new to the list. I wasn't able to commit to this work
in the past, but some changes in $dayjob have freed a tiny bit of time
so I joined the list and the group. I've been following the list via
the archives, but I hope my late arrival won't be too disruptive.)
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
More information about the CWG-Stewardship
mailing list