🚀 go-pugleaf

[ There are two sets of USENIX Standards Watchdog reports
that have not yet been posted.  This article begins the set
from the April 1989 meeting in Minneapolis.  The ones from
the July 1989 meeting in San Jose will follow later.  -mod ]

From: Jeffrey S. Haemer <jsh@ico.isc.com>


>From April to July of this year there was no report editor for 
the USENIX watchdog committee reports.  Shane McCarron, who did a 
spectacular job editing the first several sets of reports, had 
been called away to bigger (though not better :-) things.  For months, 
volunteers' reports on various aspects of the April meeting lay 
on an electronic shelf.  

In July, John Quarterman somehow got me to volunteer to do report 
editing.  Since then, I've worked both to clear out the backlog 
and to persuade volunteers to generate new reports, despite the 
fact that their old ones haven't even been posted yet.  

To get things rolling again, I've chosen to sidestep prior 
practice, and just provide edited versions of the reports I have.  
If you haven't been following these reports, the difference is 
that Shane fused the watchdog reports, his observations, and his 
opinions into strong, occasionally controversial editorials.  In 
these postings, my biases will leak through, but due to the amount 
of catching-up I need to do, I've mostly edited, not 
editorialized.  

Here's what this means.  Each edited report is tagged with the 
name and e-mail address of the original report author.  If you 
want elaboration on a statement of fact, please contact the 
watchdog; if you think the facts are presented in a light 
that lead the reader to the wrong conclusion, your argument's 
probably with me.

Jeffrey S. Haemer
Report Editor
jsh@ico.isc.com


Volume-Number: Volume 17, Number 2