[eagle] Re: A wild thought

[Jim Sanford]

Bob:
I agree.  And the issue you raise is a BIG one.  I have seen good design 
reviews turn into a complete waste due simply to having too many 
qualified people involved in one evolustion at the same time.
thanks & 73,
J
im


Robert McGwier wrote:

> I completely believe in openness.  There has been some grumbling about 
> the small peer review groups but this has more to do with unwieldy 
> meetings on these low bandwidth VoIP tools we are using than it does 
> with secrecy.  I support this completely.  I also suggest that we have 
> an official scribe at each peer review to take down detailed notes of 
> our peer review sessions to post on  EaglePedia.  Again,  the size is 
> about efficiency, not closedness.  We would welcome comments from all.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>
> Jim Sanford wrote:
>
>> Team:
>> I've been thinking about this for a while.  Recent publicity for 
>> Eagle in multiple publications has resurrected the thought, so I seek 
>> your comments.
>>
>> I'm considering seeking, for each discrete peer review, an additional 
>> review team member from AMSAT membership at large.
>>
>>   
>
>
>