From nobody Tue Oct 25 16:55:21 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 785031294D2 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:55:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W8JoEarrbVi1 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:55:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 779D6129476 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:55:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.89] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u9PNtEQY010804 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:55:14 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from phoffman@imc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.89] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: Ietf-and-github@ietf.org Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:55:14 -0700 Message-ID: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263) Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 23:55:20 -0000 Greetings. This list has been dead^Wquiet for a while, but it seems like some WGs are slowly adopting GitHub for document editing. I'm interested in how WGs that have WG documents on GitHub deal with requested updates. Instead of suggesting how it might be done, I'd love to hear some WG chairs or document authors discuss what they are doing today, maybe expanding into what they would change. Specific examples would be great. --Paul Hoffman From nobody Tue Oct 25 17:41:21 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4332B129470 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 17:41:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o2Zolb2K06T1 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 17:41:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 104BB1293FC for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 17:41:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.100] (unknown [124.189.98.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2485622E1F3; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:41:09 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:41:05 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251) Archived-At: Cc: Ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 00:41:20 -0000 Hi Paul, Can you be more specific? > On 26 Oct. 2016, at 10:55 am, Paul Hoffman wrote: > > requested updates -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Tue Oct 25 18:18:43 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60FB11294DA for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:18:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=softarmor.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0FaUFMu3hHWi for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:18:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22c.google.com (mail-oi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10D74129416 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:18:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id y2so129572992oie.0 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:18:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=softarmor.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=1NmL5WctIqK3H4kW3B3+1luzWhz9fUoenA56QU8v2QY=; b=bmqJ27BXbDtc2W3vvProhUGUg6YB7bu7NrC3y5gy6vZUaIhFI3gQTnWtPWpJg/8pdx kjRDQ/2adKWGEdufzj+k5HBi+Ahz+D+hj9YtJBIgACp8H1BOzwuKmGtvgQkZdDMHRd5x y6WPU7VOtUiqOGDQ+3ONeUwG9AHIF108m8ysA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=1NmL5WctIqK3H4kW3B3+1luzWhz9fUoenA56QU8v2QY=; b=M+vDawDfKwb3kCbSQR1VKL7RmI0YrPyyk/S9HHz8hIKhVN40B5gxpcdzmzmxf7FqKv lnXFNHfJifzUSKI5DRbBzG0tCz+0swdQhpIPqy5q3UINQPuxNuCqD9+XLE3zzD2SwGgM 8BxMfMrRDQDaJO3PGRGVIFc9dRBUnbV1bpJ7CAAtTSYcspN8CFi5SwmvGQ/YzowdW1Wc 4ID3tX6L3Xm/F4kpOlaUwQmtD+j4XOyc938luMRcxpcaQCiLul16iqthTYkctk2CnM8i oNwUaW3nMv7uVJhVJbx26A86QYPkIaNe2VznJMLcKN8H0bycofEj7Ig0GVb6axxg/tzJ D2Wg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdCA94TuEeW5NJIrfeAlkxlRbu989X/jh78dvGgAO2PwneYAATGooRSVdL70EQwHg== X-Received: by 10.157.60.174 with SMTP id z43mr6854005otc.178.1477444719438; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dw-mba1.attlocal.net ([104.50.220.72]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j10sm7753484ote.9.2016.10.25.18.18.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:18:38 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.0 \(3226\)) From: Dean Willis In-Reply-To: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:18:37 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3226) Archived-At: Cc: Ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 01:18:41 -0000 > On Oct 25, 2016, at 18:55, Paul Hoffman wrote: >=20 > Greetings. This list has been dead^Wquiet for a while, but it seems = like some WGs are slowly adopting GitHub for document editing. >=20 > I'm interested in how WGs that have WG documents on GitHub deal with = requested updates. Instead of suggesting how it might be done, I'd love = to hear some WG chairs or document authors discuss what they are doing = today, maybe expanding into what they would change. Specific examples = would be great. >=20 Well, Marc and I did a heavy edit on p2psip, with the main authors Eric = and Cullen coordinating. We kept the xml2rfc source in github, made a pull request for each major = edit, and they either accepted or didn=E2=80=99t. We used the github = issue tracker extensively. It worked pretty well. But this was several = years ago and things have certainly evolved since =E2=80=A6 =E2=80=94 Dean From nobody Tue Oct 25 18:29:02 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEB8D1294DA for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:29:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5nV3Sori0CEz for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C50F9129416 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.89] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u9Q1SwQh014006 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:28:59 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.89] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Mark Nottingham" Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:28:59 -0700 Message-ID: <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263) Archived-At: Cc: Ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 01:29:02 -0000 On 25 Oct 2016, at 17:41, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >> On 26 Oct. 2016, at 10:55 am, Paul Hoffman wrote: >> >> requested updates > > Can you be more specific? Always! :-) A person in a WG is looking at a WG draft and sees what they consider a defect. They might or might not have specific wording to remedy the defect. How do they report the defect in a way that it can be considered for the next version of the draft? --Paul Hoffman From nobody Tue Oct 25 18:50:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C3EC126CD8 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:50:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=softarmor.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hFQSKH5yx6Ez for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:50:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F3C81299F7 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:50:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id n202so957410oig.3 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:50:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=softarmor.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=kG4mAOX6VBbtbgH65OyuwxKKPSyYgnBoUnak30w9pPg=; b=hYsA6NDzOl7RvCm2/2EhohjVmEkK5qRXpGM4rgKke5XNntZhlgvZLyMJpfZfKELBap Piopxd11lO5wdoQbJ76NgE1cXIA7B0IQEJJjzCoZqOHLLi6bhQC29DCBATKygcgg/6GL j/ODsoYNepwP5DWH0qmRHg6cXI2RcLo6VzZL4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=kG4mAOX6VBbtbgH65OyuwxKKPSyYgnBoUnak30w9pPg=; b=DQ68vJmuSgnUgMckixchoBxypZmI40PeKouNUTRoROf9jtf9j5OTip2wgdPWEXemOO UnJaLdQ7JG1JsY/FuhaIzr9rEqBlvInFANoR69McqNyxwyMkUFSrbpBTkrhYLPTZd9As 8Erm8WnNk/zFICQsFk01Laan3CtJ3HWGgiB2x0LI8q2cdJeIrT5W7gnJIyWfsZcjQp1w bIaGHZ5Y+FOiLSAg182VvYoPHEus/OBRCii53tKCoMpHr4v9onF0driE+zD2jguTt86M hA0YUJOelCc0O5lcJ7lF2O9DP0VyOz6s2r9u6VyGMN599HvNxw2Yr8FeFjR3B5/FFAXZ SLNw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngve7B+AY/shbGd6vMXXS2hErRJa/viDcYhK6PdNRi/iS1iy9Ct5jr8QYSf+naWRiCQ== X-Received: by 10.202.205.199 with SMTP id d190mr5148606oig.139.1477446633311; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:50:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dw-mba1.attlocal.net ([104.50.220.72]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s23sm7689641ots.1.2016.10.25.18.50.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:50:32 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.0 \(3226\)) From: Dean Willis In-Reply-To: <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:50:31 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3226) Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , Ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 01:50:35 -0000 > On Oct 25, 2016, at 20:28, Paul Hoffman wrote: >=20 > On 25 Oct 2016, at 17:41, Mark Nottingham wrote: >=20 >>=20 >>> On 26 Oct. 2016, at 10:55 am, Paul Hoffman wrote: >>>=20 >>> requested updates >>=20 >> Can you be more specific? >=20 > Always! :-) A person in a WG is looking at a WG draft and sees what = they consider a defect. They might or might not have specific wording to = remedy the defect. How do they report the defect in a way that it can be = considered for the next version of the draft? >=20 github issue tracker? =E2=80=94 Dean From nobody Tue Oct 25 18:54:38 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B52D1293FD for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:54:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wKVj4CMN7Zom for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:54:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54E3D126CD8 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:54:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.89] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u9Q1sXsS014354 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:54:34 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.89] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Dean Willis" Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:54:34 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263) Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , Ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 01:54:37 -0000 On 25 Oct 2016, at 18:50, Dean Willis wrote: > >> On Oct 25, 2016, at 20:28, Paul Hoffman >> wrote: >> >> On 25 Oct 2016, at 17:41, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> >>> >>>> On 26 Oct. 2016, at 10:55 am, Paul Hoffman >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> requested updates >>> >>> Can you be more specific? >> >> Always! :-) A person in a WG is looking at a WG draft and sees what >> they consider a defect. They might or might not have specific wording >> to remedy the defect. How do they report the defect in a way that it >> can be considered for the next version of the draft? >> > > github issue tracker? Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not asking for suggestions, I'm asking for how WGs that are already doing this. I have been told different ways, but it might be useful to have people currently using them list them and talk about perceived advantages and disadvantages. --Paul Hoffman From nobody Tue Oct 25 21:38:24 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F067812945A for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 21:38:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 79OcS7VYHf1D for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 21:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 776F31293F0 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 21:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.104] (unknown [124.189.98.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 507BF22E1F3; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 00:38:00 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:37:57 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251) Archived-At: Cc: Ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 04:38:23 -0000 > On 26 Oct. 2016, at 12:28 pm, Paul Hoffman = wrote: >=20 > On 25 Oct 2016, at 17:41, Mark Nottingham wrote: >=20 >>=20 >>> On 26 Oct. 2016, at 10:55 am, Paul Hoffman wrote: >>>=20 >>> requested updates >>=20 >> Can you be more specific? >=20 > Always! :-) A person in a WG is looking at a WG draft and sees what = they consider a defect. They might or might not have specific wording to = remedy the defect. How do they report the defect in a way that it can be = considered for the next version of the draft? Officially, for us: https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md In a nutshell -- new issue preferred (with a pull request is fine, but = don't use a pull request to open an issue, it'll get lost). Raising the = issue on the ML is fine too.=20 People can suggest changes / bring up nits by commenting on the = individual commits, but they may get overlooked. -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Oct 26 04:57:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2FA412961E for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 04:57:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.132 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.132 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=akamai.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nDYyEgLm4ht6 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 04:57:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com [23.79.238.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 931E4129A17 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 04:57:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id D207843349F; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:57:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from prod-mail-relay10.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay10.akamai.com [172.27.118.251]) by prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC04D433424; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:57:28 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1477483048; bh=TMsNkS+Wzrdlo9l43VG7qUzltXrR/RMy9WYPNJkHzCo=; l=738; h=From:To:CC:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=OFWteaPa0O9dzxqXDq53aZazDXUuG18PR8DU+2MY0lFqWsaldi7xEaJwIvLlDt9ru sz0OHJa4BQFbDSwXn15IiDR3pA4XBzvBYXzua9ztmHnd8Mei+xp1A162VJ4pLRr/0w pgUYm+3ndsu3PzVXBdKrCvlGLJnzoMops01Yo2x8= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (ecp.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.34]) by prod-mail-relay10.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E3331FC8E; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:57:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-EXJRNL1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.99) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:57:28 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by USMA1EX-EXJRNL1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:57:27 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:57:27 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Paul Hoffman , Dean Willis Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail Thread-Index: AQHSLyHRjlewYFP5CECH7x6bwmCTT6C6NXGAgAAGBICAAAEhAIAAWuYw Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:57:27 +0000 Message-ID: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.39.15] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , "Ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:57:31 -0000 > Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not asking for suggestions, I'm asking for h= ow WGs > that are already doing this. I have been told different ways, but it migh= t be > useful to have people currently using them list them and talk about > perceived advantages and disadvantages. We follow what seems to have been HTTP-bis's lead. The document is edited on github (ietf-wg-xxxx is a project, specific docs = within that are their own repo). We use PR's extensively. We have folks o= pen issues, and we try to keep the discussion of them on the mailing list. = We use Martin Thomson's template/tooling. My biggest issue is non-mailing list discussion, but folks in the WG seem t= o get "trained" to do the right thing. From nobody Wed Oct 26 07:30:12 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39A431294E4 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:30:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.632 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ck2e3heVV-JW for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:30:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alum-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (alum-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu [18.7.68.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9099129493 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:30:07 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 1207440d-4ddff700000009a7-13-5810bded005a Received: from outgoing-alum.mit.edu (OUTGOING-ALUM.MIT.EDU [18.7.68.33]) by alum-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 32.BE.02471.DEDB0185; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:30:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.110] (c-73-186-127-100.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [73.186.127.100]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as pkyzivat@ALUM.MIT.EDU) by outgoing-alum.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id u9QEU4WO000307 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:30:05 -0400 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:30:04 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrNIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixO6iqPt2r0CEweQGVYvz//eyOzB6LFny kymAMYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoEr48vvCSwFH7kr3qxZxt7AeIyzi5GTQ0LAROLAiudsXYxcHEIC lxklvu7bwQ6SEBL4xiTxbaoAiC0sECJx8eUpZhBbREBG4vaJPkaIhgtMEnP/XWMDSbAJaEnM OfSfBcTmFbCXWHO9BayBRUBV4lLXcUYQW1QgTWL7ut3MEDWCEidnPgGr5xQIljg8+zeYzSxg K3FnLkQNs4C8xPa3c5gnMPLNQtIyC0nZLCRlCxiZVzHKJeaU5urmJmbmFKcm6xYnJ+blpRbp GunlZpbopaaUbmKEhBnvDsb/62QOMQpwMCrx8BpsEogQYk0sK67MPcQoycGkJMpbvQMoxJeU n1KZkVicEV9UmpNafIhRgoNZSYT35G6gHG9KYmVValE+TEqag0VJnFdtibqfkEB6Yklqdmpq QWoRTFaGg0NJgnfzHqBGwaLU9NSKtMycEoQ0EwcnyHAeoOErwIYXFyTmFmemQ+RPMSpKifPG gzQLgCQySvPgemFp4BWjONArwrz/Qap4gCkErvsV0GAmoMHT08EGlyQipKQaGOvK0ybFH1mv xcQh2TjJjm33T3GOeesm7CsyTGZfM1Wc9Y+ggad+dFW2yZG7LTw7C5bN/DrNKen2g/Ldsmbu TO6xC3/aatQYrPB2vjh1s6Zc4ex9m1ay88T+2LFLbo3Z0iOHVczOreP8O2mK85IFWUUG/xlP 1j+TCZ6zTTBp4dJmtoSnxR0VN5RYijMSDbWYi4oTAcmHtwveAgAA Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 14:30:10 -0000 This is all concerning to me because it seems to lead to a situation where it is hard to find and follow the discussion and reasoning that surrounds the development of the document. It is distributed between the mailing list and github. IMO it would be better to limit github to use as a tool for sharing and discussion among the authors/editors of the document. This would lead to "drops" of new -nn versions of the document to ietf that can be discussed on the mailing list, between the authors and the other members of the wg. Thanks, Paul On 10/26/16 7:57 AM, Salz, Rich wrote: > >> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not asking for suggestions, I'm asking for how WGs >> that are already doing this. I have been told different ways, but it might be >> useful to have people currently using them list them and talk about >> perceived advantages and disadvantages. > > We follow what seems to have been HTTP-bis's lead. > > The document is edited on github (ietf-wg-xxxx is a project, specific docs within that are their own repo). We use PR's extensively. We have folks open issues, and we try to keep the discussion of them on the mailing list. We use Martin Thomson's template/tooling. > > My biggest issue is non-mailing list discussion, but folks in the WG seem to get "trained" to do the right thing. > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:01:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9904127058 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:00:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w-yzr3uOZHNe for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:00:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7ADE129487 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:00:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.145] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u9QF0rLQ045119 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:00:54 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.145] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Salz, Rich" Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:00:54 -0700 Message-ID: <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263) Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , "Ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Dean Willis Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:01:00 -0000 On 26 Oct 2016, at 4:57, Salz, Rich wrote: > >> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not asking for suggestions, I'm asking >> for how WGs >> that are already doing this. I have been told different ways, but it >> might be >> useful to have people currently using them list them and talk about >> perceived advantages and disadvantages. > > We follow what seems to have been HTTP-bis's lead. > > The document is edited on github (ietf-wg-xxxx is a project, specific > docs within that are their own repo). We use PR's extensively. We > have folks open issues, and we try to keep the discussion of them on > the mailing list. We use Martin Thomson's template/tooling. > > My biggest issue is non-mailing list discussion, but folks in the WG > seem to get "trained" to do the right thing. For this WG (which I'm assuming is TLS...), what do you consider "the right thing"? --Paul Hoffman From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:08:30 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A158129564 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:08:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p23XzXq4Suuw for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6961B129572 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.145] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u9QF8LBU045392 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:08:22 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.145] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Paul Kyzivat" Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:08:22 -0700 Message-ID: <204D3E9A-2BDF-4D7D-B740-AD2D8CC1AE23@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263) Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:08:28 -0000 On 26 Oct 2016, at 7:30, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > This is all concerning to me... You are one of many people you have expressed that concern, but there are also a bunch of WGs who insist that their use of GitHub has made the discussion-and-update process much more manageable and predictable. That's why I started a tread about "what are actual WGs doing": so the concerned folks can look at working examples. --Paul Hoffman From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:44:52 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0905129694 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:44:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.132 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.132 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=akamai.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JJTKd5SDXt8X for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:44:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com [96.6.114.112]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34781129585 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:44:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 353BB200012; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:44:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com [172.27.22.68]) by prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE0520004A; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:44:48 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1477496688; bh=GJU/NylCQNMVmCEs1P5bvQBxiEYEb2NLvegpV1eNXi4=; l=264; h=From:To:CC:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=OXMFEzethpyOMEXi14fUqoMgonCf5B6K2D8juN2dML7UNVD2PUjWDlk/WbPzKLKMq y9pFJY85DikK0ETTy3lURyaqi50Xji0h3g+iDBqeVkVJCO2o0c8MdUuY4evomF/RyS 3wbjN3W0bs0BOILYS4HsiLhXGboTIxlud5GnH7To= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cas2.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.31]) by prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 060E21E07C; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:44:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-EXJRNL1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.99) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:44:47 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by USMA1EX-EXJRNL1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:44:47 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:44:47 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Paul Hoffman Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail Thread-Index: AQHSLyHRjlewYFP5CECH7x6bwmCTT6C6NXGAgAAGBICAAAEhAIAAWuYwgACAzQD//8kM8A== Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:44:46 +0000 Message-ID: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.47.64] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , "Ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Dean Willis Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:44:51 -0000 > For this WG (which I'm assuming is TLS...), what do you consider "the rig= ht > thing"? No, it's ACME (which I co-chair, not TLS which I gladly don't:). Right thi= ng is open an issue so we can track it, post a note to the mailing list for= discussion. From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:56:08 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC5BE1296EA for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:56:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.935 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.935 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C4hYrlE7Ffq8 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:56:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E903B129583 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:56:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resomta-ch2-06v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.102]) by resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id zQY6b8msXff8qzQYgbkE5G; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:56:06 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.110] ([73.186.127.100]) by resomta-ch2-06v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id zQYebLSbqLQ68zQYfbJM0M; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:56:06 +0000 To: Paul Hoffman References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <204D3E9A-2BDF-4D7D-B740-AD2D8CC1AE23@vpnc.org> From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:56:04 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <204D3E9A-2BDF-4D7D-B740-AD2D8CC1AE23@vpnc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfOADoM7QmAQ83uPecC6gj3FLNMNzGYymGr1qd1AVp9FuV8vYvBvyQdh51cpWP/5Zqu5Vcrqh+o3u3CJB2IA+rOc2HSx3Sn+vq+DNHT/fdNvZSVTQX+WK 2LY/bsi2dennS/jSC6fHpbFmM//rqZ3TdCoR5YZ1BOhv+/XE978P/sY3fXPTACvWI1Fg+7LMpRWB2n1ChAEnKh1BzcoBBgNnwzKUiqMtM8gPjlAxZlo0TG+m Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:56:08 -0000 On 10/26/16 11:08 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > On 26 Oct 2016, at 7:30, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > >> This is all concerning to me... > > You are one of many people you have expressed that concern, but there > are also a bunch of WGs who insist that their use of GitHub has made the > discussion-and-update process much more manageable and predictable. > That's why I started a tread about "what are actual WGs doing": so the > concerned folks can look at working examples. OK. I appreciate that. It will be good to hear. Note I have seen similar questions come up regarding using the IETF issue lists in WGs. Mostly I have seen that descend into chaos. I expect it can be very effective if carefully managed, but consistent norms for that don't seem to have emerged. Thanks, Paul From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:58:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D44D1294CA for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:58:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.632 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dm_hfoNxyLb4 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alum-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (alum-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu [18.7.68.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 317F0129420 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:58:28 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 12074413-991ff70000000a14-4d-5810d2a36c2e Received: from outgoing-alum.mit.edu (OUTGOING-ALUM.MIT.EDU [18.7.68.33]) by alum-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 85.01.02580.3A2D0185; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:58:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.110] (c-73-186-127-100.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [73.186.127.100]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as pkyzivat@ALUM.MIT.EDU) by outgoing-alum.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id u9QFwQqq005092 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:58:27 -0400 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:58:26 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrGIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixO6iqLvkkkCEwdXnYhbn/+9ld2D0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxpKfN5gL3jNXnJy+jqWBsYG5i5GDQ0LARGLCP64uRi4OIYHL jBLLXnxj7GLkBHK+MUlsO+AOYgsLhEhcfHmKGcQWEZCRuH2ijxGi4TSzxJLeW+wgCTYBLYk5 h/6zgNi8AvYSqy9fABvEIqAqseHEdiYQW1QgTWL7ut3MEDWCEidnPgGr5xQIlrj44RzYHGYB W4k7cyFqmAXkJba/ncM8gZFvFpKWWUjKZiEpW8DIvIpRLjGnNFc3NzEzpzg1Wbc4OTEvL7VI 11wvN7NELzWldBMjJMiEdzDuOil3iFGAg1GJh9dgk0CEEGtiWXFl7iFGSQ4mJVHeNyeAQnxJ +SmVGYnFGfFFpTmpxYcYJTiYlUR4l5wDyvGmJFZWpRblw6SkOViUxHnVlqj7CQmkJ5akZqem FqQWwWRlODiUJHh7LwI1ChalpqdWpGXmlCCkmTg4QYbzAA2vBanhLS5IzC3OTIfIn2LU5Vjw 4/ZaJiGWvPy8VClx3gSQIgGQoozSPLg5sOTwilEc6C1h3rcgVTzAxAI36RXQEiagJdPTwZaU JCKkpBoY3QLYD01843frh+3qvZJS3VNOn99x2LvD+fmf2qMfbQRz/b/f7p50dPWSI1u2TqyV vL+Hq2lN3RV7Wwn7r9rzxRkfryuPF01z/ftsxscL5261aN0TrZyXu5VB9f/S3fxrJi4RFzEJ 1M1UnvPHM7BWTdIgms0jwUu2tMaP2Xnr+199jW2Pn5XtVmIpzkg01GIuKk4EAIi4T/fpAgAA Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:58:31 -0000 On 10/26/16 11:44 AM, Salz, Rich wrote: >> For this WG (which I'm assuming is TLS...), what do you consider "the right >> thing"? > > No, it's ACME (which I co-chair, not TLS which I gladly don't:). Right thing is open an issue so we can track it, post a note to the mailing list for discussion. Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to be following what is going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged just following the mailing list? Thanks, Paul From nobody Wed Oct 26 09:01:12 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8D7E129565 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:01:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.132 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.132 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=akamai.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lDBLAeiVesno for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com [96.6.114.98]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F84129A4E for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:00:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D5D496C2C; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:00:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com [172.27.22.71]) by prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB8E496C24; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:00:55 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1477497655; bh=fEoOqHfo4vhmc+KV5g5XcjIkp2YQWxIkQYVDkIstN6E=; l=370; h=From:To:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=KiWYzGgZCmXjFtA9cxyq0bfq+SE/KXtCiNZMFnXkn5kh03cRscSZI8zrFOUN/thGc 73f6PeqV2EnFiTpY54KjpYlHZUrUQDmVMZNMVpgTcfS5W/E5sidzHo6Ca0aK/PMPnz SoCcS9JknTtQyGItHQgJJEVhmsk47k7ly2+eWUWA= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cas2.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.31]) by prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50DE498082; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:00:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:00:54 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:00:54 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Paul Kyzivat , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail Thread-Index: AQHSLyHRjlewYFP5CECH7x6bwmCTT6C6NXGAgAAGBICAAAEhAIAAWuYwgACAzQD//8kM8IAARwgA//+9bVA= Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:00:53 +0000 Message-ID: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.47.64] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:01:11 -0000 > Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to be following what= is > going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged just following the > mailing list? The intent is that all WG business happens on the mailing list. Sometimes a discussion will start there with "I posted a new issue, please = see ..." and there will be a clickable link. From nobody Wed Oct 26 09:13:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D27129B84 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:12:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qNYndSrO6IY3 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:12:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x22e.google.com (mail-qk0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B87A129A4E for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:12:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id x11so9800162qka.1 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:12:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9E4/VyWhxGNjLORp55CzliekUlGWa2k/0UYuSSaIRag=; b=vRykquYhZ4TJQz3t9OrzKTGmmQuL7F+/TPaJdy4NzJdYHBA/o3UalkS9IGu9feEfEP Jc5rk4mAGU/Kys+jtm0HBPgAzGFqPq0e/kcJ1aDSvWjGj2MpHhP9qGW6pMqW6horMg5s bAhivRSqY8phjvzKM7yVxpqb8c+vImZfiDCrByCwO0q1HlZYjQ/S9zSf1i6l3/5IWL/9 z+CWYN15rU2VUjaj8ZrTJ1TjXpflsg8k8pTqq6tkPA7aNBS7ZXH6VUKf5s+qrHVOi4rc ReX0UJ0fJDHSMdbx1pFzQk77XuVmf7N6UK8o+YS4PIVsiYd1XpgSn9SC/v5NbAUKh8X/ VcgA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9E4/VyWhxGNjLORp55CzliekUlGWa2k/0UYuSSaIRag=; b=RLvneUOGNCOpqjcf14cdCORLbbQYLCO7IAow6EkWgf9lz7EVxjRmnO8PskVpK+f0fk yUcbsBm1Bc/NoU+jSCVTysEwKfZX5H861rAZfYnT22Lt3NUoU03LdvLRPMbaHN8AH8+O 2PjB/CBLLsfovQSUx7iNzPFqzPndJaHCwt5zi7YWAWeE59d3lN+fcS39QXnoC5bj9UAu +o6nMLtPn/6Vz9ZO4TUR3Y57QDf1rLnjOtT4VbItvhfCb+90CI/IlYxvIh79xtsZ0asa En57oZSafR7gUV5Q2MtGC1WnVZMh5iDw23le5eql+EY09D9NlcoWz7V7l8ahrQmV1oKv idmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvf974mfS/VrhG7nZLtdxkkg1voaScGncaSfslBQlxBGoXC+CpA0ARNZ7re52PZGDCExuVhTReFtyLdEPQI2 X-Received: by 10.55.10.142 with SMTP id 136mr2351897qkk.192.1477498346463; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:12:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.147.100 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:11:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> From: Warren Kumari Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 18:11:47 +0200 Message-ID: To: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: Ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:12:48 -0000 On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:55 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > Greetings. This list has been dead^Wquiet for a while, but it seems like > some WGs are slowly adopting GitHub for document editing. > > I'm interested in how WGs that have WG documents on GitHub deal with > requested updates. Instead of suggesting how it might be done, I'd love to > hear some WG chairs or document authors discuss what they are doing today, > maybe expanding into what they would change. Specific examples would be > great. So, this isn't really an instance of a WG doing this, but an example from an author -- I'm an author on a document in DNSOP. I stuck the document in Github because it makes it easier *for me and my co-authors* to collaborate, but the document also says: [ This document is being collaborated on in Github at: https://github.com/wkumari/draft-ietf- dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse. The most recent version of the document, open issues, etc should all be available here. The authors (gratefully) accept pull requests.] The document got a good amount of feedback during WGLC -- some of the suggestions were minor, and some of them were much larger. The discussion happened on the mailing list, but having a place where I could integrate / address people suggestions, and then publish a new "mini-version" to make sure that their comment had been addressed was (IMO) helpful. The repo has ~40 commits, being able to say "I addressed your comment $here, is this good now?" instead of publishing 40 version of the draft was helpful. A number of people also sent pull requests -- this was much simpler for both me, and (I think!) the contributor -- a PR with a bunch of nits is easier to write than: O: query the example.com serves and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) record starting that there are no records (alphabetically) between P: query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) record stating that there are no records (alphabetically) between C: You have 'serves' instead of 'servers' at the beginning of the text, and also you get back a record **staring**, not **starting**. I realize that this only partially answers your question, or answers a subtly different question -- welcome to the IETF :-P W > > --Paul Hoffman > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Wed Oct 26 09:52:36 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63930129706 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:52:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.632 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id svky2QKDhF5Z for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alum-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (alum-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu [18.7.68.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DC21129762 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:52:28 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 1207440f-1f3ff700000009a9-14-5810df4b2ceb Received: from outgoing-alum.mit.edu (OUTGOING-ALUM.MIT.EDU [18.7.68.33]) by alum-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 7E.4E.02473.B4FD0185; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:52:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.110] (c-73-186-127-100.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [73.186.127.100]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as pkyzivat@ALUM.MIT.EDU) by outgoing-alum.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id u9QGqQFi008103 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:52:27 -0400 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: <3609c6be-ee12-e1e5-0e3e-5bc410d26055@alum.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:52:26 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrNIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixO6iqOt9XyDC4Mk6FYvz//eyOzB6LFny kymAMYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoEro2P5AcaCf6IVjd2XWRoYLwl2MXJySAiYSBz7uIy9i5GLQ0jg MqPExBtzWSGcb0wS3VPnsYFUCQuESFx8eYoZxBYRkJG4faKPEaKokVGiu38JO0iCTUBLYs6h /yxdjBwcvAL2ElceuIOEWQRUJf7OWsUEYosKpElsX7cbbA6vgKDEyZlPWEBsToFAibOb3oPF mQVsJe7M3Q1ly0tsfzuHeQIj3ywkLbOQlM1CUraAkXkVo1xiTmmubm5iZk5xarJucXJiXl5q ka6JXm5miV5qSukmRkiY8e9g7Fovc4hRgINRiYfXYJNAhBBrYllxZe4hRkkOJiVR3jcngEJ8 SfkplRmJxRnxRaU5qcWHGCU4mJVEeOXuAeV4UxIrq1KL8mFS0hwsSuK86kvU/YQE0hNLUrNT UwtSi2CyMhwcShK8FiCNgkWp6akVaZk5JQhpJg5OkOE8QMO/3AUZXlyQmFucmQ6RP8WoKCXO Ww3SLACSyCjNg+uFpYFXjOJArwjzGoJU8QBTCFz3K6DBTECDp6eDDS5JREhJNTDWB+d92WrI w5nvtM5YyPzRre3lmreVCr9WVrsV2emb3N4nPVkkwzV4ee+7/berZ7o8kdS0sn0wo4rfaoJJ QrHGs8+r/vCLN+on/jt2qaWnJOgLwzPFBtbf/hkNYhtNLaL3nBCOmDvfzt10meO0fbEtRzO2 Km5tnnpcq2lyfdic2QsNUk8HWiixFGckGmoxFxUnAgAgTqaB3gIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:52:35 -0000 This approach sounds exactly right to me! On 10/26/16 12:11 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:55 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: >> Greetings. This list has been dead^Wquiet for a while, but it seems like >> some WGs are slowly adopting GitHub for document editing. >> >> I'm interested in how WGs that have WG documents on GitHub deal with >> requested updates. Instead of suggesting how it might be done, I'd love to >> hear some WG chairs or document authors discuss what they are doing today, >> maybe expanding into what they would change. Specific examples would be >> great. > > So, this isn't really an instance of a WG doing this, but an example > from an author -- I'm an author on a document in DNSOP. I stuck the > document in Github because it makes it easier *for me and my > co-authors* to collaborate, but the document also says: > > [ This document is being > collaborated on in Github at: https://github.com/wkumari/draft-ietf- > dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse. The most recent version of the document, > open issues, etc should all be available here. The authors > (gratefully) accept pull requests.] > > The document got a good amount of feedback during WGLC -- some of the > suggestions were minor, and some of them were much larger. The > discussion happened on the mailing list, but having a place where I > could integrate / address people suggestions, and then publish a new > "mini-version" to make sure that their comment had been addressed was > (IMO) helpful. The repo has ~40 commits, being able to say "I > addressed your comment $here, is this good now?" instead of publishing > 40 version of the draft was helpful. > > A number of people also sent pull requests -- this was much simpler > for both me, and (I think!) the contributor -- a PR with a bunch of > nits is easier to write than: > > O: query the example.com serves and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) > query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) > record starting that there are no records (alphabetically) between > P: query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) > query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) > record stating that there are no records (alphabetically) between > C: You have 'serves' instead of 'servers' at the beginning of the > text, and also you get back a record **staring**, not **starting**. > > I realize that this only partially answers your question, or answers a > subtly different question -- welcome to the IETF :-P > > W > > >> >> --Paul Hoffman >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > From nobody Wed Oct 26 12:26:44 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 794DD129967 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:26:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1V2yMloGMK85 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:26:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x235.google.com (mail-pf0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10E3312995A for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:26:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x235.google.com with SMTP id 197so1960337pfu.0 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:26:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pwxQNnMItmPqd32h9A6sfGShWX5ciKo+OJ6y7XFlanU=; b=qcGapwDh5F9uhpehekuOpuWYq1kYXTxlBbEsiB/zGtg6xE1UQV/2jQKRtKSRbqSr5e cygM9QLubB7ZU3clan+qNwR+dTCEECqhVP4705Z08WPe+12V8youqsHws/tKhOUruvRZ VKd92zUPH9NRkpxE0AE++2eGw37Vjz6W1fNg/RWC0XGlVWp2fyuP1DV6ie71Az/03bVt qd+CXFFOQ1ywioJbj8iZRfUkdpnRO26VMfNHxydQYsCFfp9QZPLlsaAYQ+DYy8jrdGrM UM94itFoSO9ayrSUUxIzn9otcK40QAeVdUwZ4IDvdeMcQ6lH1hy/xKRUKChMsOeYn7eg wQUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=pwxQNnMItmPqd32h9A6sfGShWX5ciKo+OJ6y7XFlanU=; b=Z0ulySezBSHtkOTg98OHg/GN3E4miJPHqePqCK6Od7t2aRozWMUO9ZuA/HsntjADvL 7A3xonZltFXckDHsla066HBDc4mOF4kF4+S7DWy2OP6Gx54EDXOxpgUIVRiXIvHmVY9p jl7u82gVHnQ3EG8ZZMN2oi4642bsEsSl/O4kuKGDAVcGKUCLPADwjj2uAUdwXX8PV/d3 Bz19fbVhByqHBnd4d211hP5efhxnXd9iSp9EGRgpmXiLXQ0bJ4/+IC5eP8TD06hg8O1W h3UDfk8g71kOxVXPe8R75EEraXSZZn+2zzonXnRV6n2fonMqOHhAFmohxBRHmC8zFueQ Gpfw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfvDLJSFKlCf9BmehEnaOwhe26F50TX86WYQoqgQ+kdefNUr87hTGeedmfzD1SBZw== X-Received: by 10.98.18.23 with SMTP id a23mr6906203pfj.151.1477509999575; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:26:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:44d7:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:44d7:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 3sm6015976pfo.31.2016.10.26.12.26.37 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:26:39 -0700 (PDT) To: Paul Kyzivat , ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <3609c6be-ee12-e1e5-0e3e-5bc410d26055@alum.mit.edu> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <9cfa3185-e6b9-aec9-9485-be29ce726db1@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:26:43 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3609c6be-ee12-e1e5-0e3e-5bc410d26055@alum.mit.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 19:26:42 -0000 On 27/10/2016 05:52, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > This approach sounds exactly right to me! Yes. We've been doing something even simpler at https://github.com/becarpenter/animaproto. We use that just as a repo, all discussion of issues on the WG list, and fine details on the design team list. The open and resolved issues are logged in (temporary) appendices in the document itself. Similarly https://github.com/mbehring/ANIMA-Reference-Model, except there is no formalised issues list. One interesting choice is whether you decide to put a "generic" or versioned xml file in the repo. For the first of these two examples, I chose the versioned approach: draft-ietf-anima-grasp-00.xml, draft-ietf-anima-grasp-01.xml, etc. For the second one, Michael chose the generic approach: every version is draft-ietf-anima-reference-model.xml Personally I have never been very happy with mechanised issue trackers; they seem at least as much bother as they are worth. Brian > On 10/26/16 12:11 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:55 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: >>> Greetings. This list has been dead^Wquiet for a while, but it seems like >>> some WGs are slowly adopting GitHub for document editing. >>> >>> I'm interested in how WGs that have WG documents on GitHub deal with >>> requested updates. Instead of suggesting how it might be done, I'd love to >>> hear some WG chairs or document authors discuss what they are doing today, >>> maybe expanding into what they would change. Specific examples would be >>> great. >> >> So, this isn't really an instance of a WG doing this, but an example >> from an author -- I'm an author on a document in DNSOP. I stuck the >> document in Github because it makes it easier *for me and my >> co-authors* to collaborate, but the document also says: >> >> [ This document is being >> collaborated on in Github at: https://github.com/wkumari/draft-ietf- >> dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse. The most recent version of the document, >> open issues, etc should all be available here. The authors >> (gratefully) accept pull requests.] >> >> The document got a good amount of feedback during WGLC -- some of the >> suggestions were minor, and some of them were much larger. The >> discussion happened on the mailing list, but having a place where I >> could integrate / address people suggestions, and then publish a new >> "mini-version" to make sure that their comment had been addressed was >> (IMO) helpful. The repo has ~40 commits, being able to say "I >> addressed your comment $here, is this good now?" instead of publishing >> 40 version of the draft was helpful. >> >> A number of people also sent pull requests -- this was much simpler >> for both me, and (I think!) the contributor -- a PR with a bunch of >> nits is easier to write than: >> >> O: query the example.com serves and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) >> query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) >> record starting that there are no records (alphabetically) between >> P: query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) >> query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) >> record stating that there are no records (alphabetically) between >> C: You have 'serves' instead of 'servers' at the beginning of the >> text, and also you get back a record **staring**, not **starting**. >> >> I realize that this only partially answers your question, or answers a >> subtly different question -- welcome to the IETF :-P >> >> W >> >> >>> >>> --Paul Hoffman >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Thu Oct 27 04:37:31 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70A81129D84 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 04:37:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.331 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.331 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3bc2UCi6Wp0N for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 04:37:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2::117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9F18129D82 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 04:37:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5CEF7C09F1 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 13:37:25 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qc91O972ysjW for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 13:37:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hta-hippo.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:1043:12:8ce5:3452:490f:68fe]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 356577C09ED for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 13:37:24 +0200 (CEST) To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> From: Harald Alvestrand Message-ID: <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 13:37:23 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:37:30 -0000 RTCWEB has been using github extensively. https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/ My experience as document author has been varying across repos: - https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/rtcweb-transport has been my own notepad. I have used the issue tracker to copy/paste text from the mailing list discussion (when I didn't, it turned out I often forgot about the issue), used PRs to structure "here's the solution to this problem, here's the solution to that problem", editing on master for small / speedy changes, and generally doing what I wanted to do. - https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep has been a collaborative effort between the 3 document editors (not me). I've filed a few issues there, and made comments on others. It's been useful to keep track of whether my issues are resolved (I keep links of them in other repos), but I've otherwise kept at arm's length from it. There are a couple of other repos that exist, but don't matter - they have had little activity. A repo is not a guarantee of life. - https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-stats (not an IETF repo) is me and a collaborator working together. We use the built-in issue tracker to keep track of who's promised to do what, and the PR mechanism to look at each others' suggested text before committing it. In other contexts (W3C), I've found that some people work entirely on github, and ignore mailing lists. Especially they ignore the mailing lists of other groups than their own. This is a problem for people who expect to watch the mailing lists to figure out if anything is happening; unless they also watch the repo, things "change underneath them". I haven't yet found a good way to keep a "zeitgeist sync" between the mailing list and the github repos. I could go into much more details about my W3C experience with github, but since the request was for IETF experience, I think I'll stop now. On 10/26/2016 01:55 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > Greetings. This list has been dead^Wquiet for a while, but it seems > like some WGs are slowly adopting GitHub for document editing. > > I'm interested in how WGs that have WG documents on GitHub deal with > requested updates. Instead of suggesting how it might be done, I'd > love to hear some WG chairs or document authors discuss what they are > doing today, maybe expanding into what they would change. Specific > examples would be great. > > --Paul Hoffman > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Thu Oct 27 07:16:34 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF19C129462 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 07:16:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eC27MzFdj8Oa for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 07:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB6E512967C for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 07:16:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.105] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u9REGAmr018776 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 27 Oct 2016 07:16:11 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.105] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Harald Alvestrand" Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 07:16:11 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263) Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 14:16:34 -0000 On 27 Oct 2016, at 4:37, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > I could go into much more details about my W3C experience with github, > but since the request was for IETF experience, I think I'll stop now. The W3C is our closest cousin, and therefor experience there could be relevant here. Please continue. --Paul Hoffman From nobody Thu Oct 27 08:19:24 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2901B129A67 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:19:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=softarmor.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vvxZNPEUzcgc for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:19:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22b.google.com (mail-oi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10F9F12996A for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id n202so53034106oig.3 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:19:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=softarmor.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=fwzS0/Ew1mFeGDfH+I28dkGjmblSm9ZeXCkvS2fbUXs=; b=JG+NhUWUqWnrgAyJ0u8Ja6LrgZh3C4iU8SwwtzOYa/JJDeyHL6movLd1h/PHsJOjBJ HKaXbtX18Qt+DkgqA97rFPM3Xq4HFgvkuYdBM4JwPPNFIzKX7QJ4c8oCApeUAsrqdbU/ pqAXJFO3SLHE3nMBpWX9g3PZgfkmwFk6pDHTw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=fwzS0/Ew1mFeGDfH+I28dkGjmblSm9ZeXCkvS2fbUXs=; b=RKj5Dkna5jl0YxK6w9C+rnBlPFGnw83ggJUb3RXgVeBfofSiP2jBNsdTzkCp4IHOn6 qRNfBA5ay2r4A9yBX0uh5K4Kc6SCNcZZSBaFQBpYXvZP9dvlVcIGzuCakVLO2je1HkAz 1QMOvka+NyhD/nLGoVdKQ+OovKOSWYvTNrVHqM48zwjSfADLQhrP5qOLrezinD5bZXRC Kwhdbq7Nrps28r37mUOeJL7fKTOiNv1w2FHlvxNdrvZ71a0Rs0wrT2QOZO7QPBxEOEr6 j0RbsrBZrsrA/5dl7X0GOF8vzNluMo1gN2rM18UJne7uS0KzI/xZrIlSwypKVhQe0y16 xaCA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcADir2eHo12r0y/ScdQvA5pNNlL7hh9yL6eTYAFZifJeflVHwevE+rY5Jf1u+35w== X-Received: by 10.157.62.244 with SMTP id b107mr6997007otc.242.1477581546919; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:19:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dw-mba1.attlocal.net ([104.50.220.72]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s33sm2354011ota.37.2016.10.27.08.19.05 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:19:05 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.0 \(3226\)) From: Dean Willis In-Reply-To: <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 10:19:04 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> To: Harald Alvestrand X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3226) Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 15:19:22 -0000 > On Oct 27, 2016, at 06:37, Harald Alvestrand = wrote: >=20 >=20 > In other contexts (W3C), I've found that some people work entirely on > github, and ignore mailing lists. Especially they ignore the mailing > lists of other groups than their own. This is a problem for people who > expect to watch the mailing lists to figure out if anything is > happening; unless they also watch the repo, things "change underneath = them". > I haven't yet found a good way to keep a "zeitgeist sync" between the > mailing list and the github repos. >=20 Could one copy issue tracker and PR notifications to the mailing list? = Or would that drive the list crazy? =E2=80=94 Dean From nobody Thu Oct 27 08:34:03 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 691291295CF for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:34:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.631 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CgjcxqMcYPzx for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:33:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D67B129603 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:33:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B37127C0A1E for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:33:39 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yvhzFZQcfONU for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:33:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hta-hippo.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:1043:12:8ce5:3452:490f:68fe]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9A53B7C0A0F for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:33:35 +0200 (CEST) To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> From: Harald Alvestrand Message-ID: Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:33:35 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 15:34:02 -0000 On 10/27/2016 05:19 PM, Dean Willis wrote: >> On Oct 27, 2016, at 06:37, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> >> >> In other contexts (W3C), I've found that some people work entirely on >> github, and ignore mailing lists. Especially they ignore the mailing >> lists of other groups than their own. This is a problem for people who >> expect to watch the mailing lists to figure out if anything is >> happening; unless they also watch the repo, things "change underneath them". >> I haven't yet found a good way to keep a "zeitgeist sync" between the >> mailing list and the github repos. >> > Could one copy issue tracker and PR notifications to the mailing list? Or would that drive the list crazy? It drives the list crazy. We have been doing that on public-webrtc@w3.org for a few months now, and it has essentially rendered the list silent except for the notifications - real mail gets lost in the barrage of notifications. > > — > Dean > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Thu Oct 27 10:37:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26BA2129551 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 10:37:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.268 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.268 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=3.599, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YDR7BOt9fS_e for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 10:37:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F098129593 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 10:37:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unnumerable.local (ip-64-134-232-14.public.wayport.net [64.134.232.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u9RHbXuW088699 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:37:35 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host ip-64-134-232-14.public.wayport.net [64.134.232.14] claimed to be unnumerable.local To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> From: Robert Sparks Message-ID: <9a727f09-b35d-bff7-12d7-a8188aebf0b1@nostrum.com> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 10:37:27 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:37:39 -0000 For those not on the list Harald mentioned, he started a related conversation there that is worth watching. is a good entry point (and is currently the end of the thread but hopefully there will be more commentary). RjS On 10/27/16 8:33 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > On 10/27/2016 05:19 PM, Dean Willis wrote: >>> On Oct 27, 2016, at 06:37, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >>> >>> >>> In other contexts (W3C), I've found that some people work entirely on >>> github, and ignore mailing lists. Especially they ignore the mailing >>> lists of other groups than their own. This is a problem for people who >>> expect to watch the mailing lists to figure out if anything is >>> happening; unless they also watch the repo, things "change underneath them". >>> I haven't yet found a good way to keep a "zeitgeist sync" between the >>> mailing list and the github repos. >>> >> Could one copy issue tracker and PR notifications to the mailing list? Or would that drive the list crazy? > It drives the list crazy. We have been doing that on > public-webrtc@w3.org for a few months now, and it has essentially > rendered the list silent except for the notifications - real mail gets > lost in the barrage of notifications. > >> — >> Dean >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Thu Oct 27 17:41:52 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEDF512966A for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:41:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=itaoyama.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9_G7WmzCRhWn for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:41:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from JPN01-OS2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-os2jpn01on0119.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.92.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C321512962C for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:41:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=itaoyama.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-it-aoyama-ac-jp; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=3ABc6T9TEYuW3o4c/Mn9lx+keh5U0pS0UDjszAhHRvg=; b=XP5azKbg8CG56EJ4Bm/9/EBnwSLz83D3LNwMQwahfYPuBP6/txmiXiI76Zqj1sC85Fk++sF+Akjegxfft7pPyXvndPaiURsVXGRIr7ovCRVjV4j2lgrGmUegCAqJi+s7fI2tyjMO1MVAvLj0vtpfIkKsOu2wK8SgFsC84HeC3uM= Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp; Received: from [133.2.210.64] (133.2.210.64) by TYXPR0101MB0991.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com (10.168.45.146) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.679.12; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:41:44 +0000 To: Harald Alvestrand , References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_J._D=c3=bcrst?= Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:41:41 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [133.2.210.64] X-ClientProxiedBy: KAWPR01CA0024.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com (10.161.24.34) To TYXPR0101MB0991.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com (10.168.45.146) X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: d294f8d2-4c4f-4a14-d557-08d3fecb30f5 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; TYXPR0101MB0991; 2:DNzHe0WZBxtMgugZicCjP8gRVundZrSvO+YtwoRw6ju42yxito2Bqt4KzYKyMFqePak6dxW3AWPIxl1vPCuF05v4abEtkRveGr6JznCzDK9ZLQXEl0MeBzI3uXZCC9UN4DPWwgy2Ve45hxEwFjfyK/k99FH9moXfmAFJlTLBBs3HyWjvQoBE+ssi7i6S2o1p/Z1DwGt3PxUGKONRT/XDGg==; 3:awBmZVxn+Xcjj0kVeqN9EoIMHs9oqAOHbTGaskKpB1q1P+00XjW7/2JYIXLCy2uoyn7Xn0FrjM5GpbcaeTCjrbcRpUFujJML95oz+3+gesiyXAvqlyPmcL94Rkmcu1wrDyAz6wvnfVtHVza8vHkZxw==; 25:mGM2/Io0s9taj9qKoaXTEos0Xvl/Nw165Et6Fszy2l4+CdqSCT/qp1bnU2DMaSFwLGHeD/PFl9CCNdPdgc5lrbBfY0aNRAfX9gaJgHtbHD5NBbevWFossXutObpzpRe5wOWjS9Ikg3z9QlwTBaTwDr7qG+aROBQZUOSGhIzz93cs5o4Mk2AD4hIPbU40nSnDZcAQYb85VurRj+SapBAO+Uxpl+GbYGfSSn8dKRklkyhoPN/n43VfmfqmjxO9GhMySTbu8fgbRi5stsYKoAPTVcrGmZibl+7dzkXpgCiulw9+qPtIL29ObRJ70Nj27eIDrNmV8AZPlC3sJ61SUbUGWY6nrHXP+l3X5SCm7SgTECJl7JfVjD0kP++ShZkt2b6eb4NrABqXHPrgDGM9rfLa2uKfr0bG0HCCUO7xsU26qS/NtVXkL/vn8+hg9tE7fTaI X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:TYXPR0101MB0991; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; TYXPR0101MB0991; 31:GEzuy+BBSx2Tbqp0SBazyUK7Ux49KSgwEioK61it1coK9qZBFH0RvvnJb/ejumPgo1qsBAcsWGHmCF61ThWqAdpze5zF6OYAdzu0RbV28aGpe5XnRjnaEG7pygY2IotqbexKeH93L9S0C7+ziwzeEetCLZks1ujr+3PeFiyVUB9aMb8BY9TSvJy2+wIte4MO/gEe2rMudu1Ht+ZIe0EH5WNi+8cD44tCRE0DBKZ9Ec7OrchY/hC7V6zp50tdTJLA; 4:YOWBSb3cVOmRq8tUW5e556FwAfqTu9iFmmyAWoUmdAYdUP4QwrREcRLCl8xIfK90GtKVKixtws8+0f+PlElGlgd5Zqg2zwY8DtYX4kolMRetRgK4ngztnu7RWwZMv+OaYYfgCA7GMCzD4T537XyWnwfKAlEbAibfmMuCVc5fIZpt/A++pneWBFw/EIRbOLM4lL34N2IOl642E3ow+9EPjHPBDn2ESO5sbXIq0rBE5msh1VZjPyfMCxZSWb3NNbKL3vdqJ6Jawm4P3J8T5nvjJLLosqWPzf0s3Lb0Ax3ZQ2giV07bJSoUzpcGOeIyKhNzklkdfzxiE6Ad1gA2pcfyHsNO8AO63F7vzfBzJO3egyHuFkl003hQxCFpeVtRF1tlI0rLv+qZrhD1mdVtV/P1tGHqbCJlFl1lbAFL6+3ZG358nKtjY80Uys5yxz5gtug1UFSL6Q1jw9O/PslnAEYz4g== X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:(133089375551178); X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040176)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(6043046)(6042046); SRVR:TYXPR0101MB0991; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:TYXPR0101MB0991; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0109D382B0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4630300001)(6009001)(6049001)(7916002)(189002)(377454003)(199003)(24454002)(31686004)(42882006)(81166006)(2950100002)(8676002)(81156014)(76176999)(86362001)(54356999)(6116002)(3846002)(77096005)(586003)(23676002)(15975445007)(92566002)(230700001)(101416001)(50986999)(42186005)(31696002)(6666003)(64126003)(105586002)(93886004)(305945005)(68736007)(65826007)(50466002)(230783001)(19580395003)(19580405001)(33646002)(5660300001)(74482002)(189998001)(106356001)(7846002)(107886002)(83506001)(66066001)(47776003)(5001770100001)(65956001)(4001350100001)(7736002)(65806001)(97736004)(2906002)(3940600001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:TYXPR0101MB0991; H:[133.2.210.64]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:0; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: it.aoyama.ac.jp does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?utf-8?B?MTtUWVhQUjAxMDFNQjA5OTE7MjM6dndDMWI0bDh1NG9wemxobUZrQVNaUUc0?= =?utf-8?B?S25RU3pQK3ZNMEJUMWw1SERhTXg5WmVwZmFCV240VG5oa3U1Z0Y2SGZuWVRL?= =?utf-8?B?T2VSSTBpZ1VoNlFqcW96WUtKazZLTnRSeEdlTU1SVmJ6ZVNLWVIyMFJQc2JK?= =?utf-8?B?RWNSK2h3aVJZWWVvYU1tR2xkSitFZTB2T3pFVFNOYlZ4My9Ld2xFbjIzcHVS?= =?utf-8?B?dG5PZ3Evd3Y2eFRyem9BcHdkM3Z4ME1CNFpDWEkrOEhtQzkzYnY0eXBCd1Bw?= =?utf-8?B?Uk1MbHJwbm1YcWdZVGxtTit3R3UyaXlvNWJjaEJTQWRGY0tkUGJ2S1VJemRE?= =?utf-8?B?Q3lOWEYyWkRYYTlKT0t6YXlZRmpLN0lhLzVNdllmOVYyVHBya0FrUVVHQTNG?= =?utf-8?B?NmlzQjBBL3RiZm5TNkhJNXJmRjA3WWdFVlYremxmYlJxeElnblhmdXN1MUtL?= =?utf-8?B?OXhXeDI1WVQ3ejhiZ3hOMDAzQzhTYVg4d3Z4d09LM29BUWtJUDFpcnVVM0pp?= =?utf-8?B?L2VSdGpDMERUcGdoa25INHJ4OE5iRjN2dzJwU0orcnBHcnpBZU1hYmpQcUp4?= =?utf-8?B?Y3owL25xZWNURGpSN0dJR1U4cEhKVUFNMzNQcm9WVGYyQWpPbjdEQnlTckRk?= =?utf-8?B?UU5lOUxFZ1NwU0FuWEFPNUg2U1VwNHpGUmV0dDBtYXo2Y1AvSnpJdFpzR2ph?= =?utf-8?B?SUdjM2puSVF1Y0JGanRnUWdHWG84UTE0bnl2aGJKZ2pXNFJoNDhNcFpsby82?= =?utf-8?B?VGg3c25IZjM3V2ZXT2FiSk4vNWVFbzI4K2NTVXUyYVB1NlZEK2pmQWEzcVR0?= =?utf-8?B?TVMyWnpHc29UMXArcExPRytlenhhajYyaHkrYWladE1vRnJwL29VaVlPZ1VV?= =?utf-8?B?RURqcmRleTlTQUlZVjdaVmpVVmU5eDZyRDF5VEd6U002VjNwTFJTNHV5b1V5?= =?utf-8?B?b1dVZGtDR29FU09sM2h5K09kY2M0b1YzVEJkem9TS2NxMTdSdTRDaWpFSnFW?= =?utf-8?B?MVVzWDF1QURCOXpVS3N4OUVjVmRBb1U2SXZyZEdlMXB6dkd4TXZtOThTa1RJ?= =?utf-8?B?bUVCK0FESDB5VEdzZWIralk1VzZtR2JFNUN4cUNKaHpQTmVHc3pNVC9CQVR6?= =?utf-8?B?dTJIU2tKMER4Ym00SjNNTlpla21KaFY2bjBCMlZLbFYvK1dacis5NWIvUEJk?= =?utf-8?B?ckE5QVhaL2N2UzF0QVR0MDZRaFl5d3JNUHN6eWdweTU3TmhRUFY5T2NNRW16?= =?utf-8?B?a0wrS0lmSWRwTGRWaWFwUjdVTmQ4d2haTGdWS0RqOFZoTUdWdWdqVG8rL3E1?= =?utf-8?B?eFo3UHpRdEM1ellzMk5pZnprZUlnTnlmRTV3MjQzVkhqZldTKzcwdmJpSjZv?= =?utf-8?B?NmhyY3hib3ZVbTRkUG85TVdSYWpSeGMyK21lbUo5NzBYbE4vbDUwaWNVWFVE?= =?utf-8?B?dURzbFYvQzN5Q3hvZktKNzhrdExXaHZIaE9ZRE9UdmM1bVREQnNJSGY1S2pY?= =?utf-8?B?a1VGQnNCNzE1Lzc1Mlp0ZklGZzN4M2M0UjBqVkh6by9xWEtYamlQZ21zZWYy?= =?utf-8?B?TVRSZlZqVVNRdHM3aTlUbjlpOTB0SGVsdnhCdlo4WjFBV2V3TzNMdmVmMW1q?= =?utf-8?B?bms1ak0rcjdLZkpkSlZYRXhkMHJKUmRlN3Zqc3hJcFNTQzlnZzdZbU9vZWFT?= =?utf-8?B?MnNyM2kxSkVUUm5ydFp0cFptaU5vWGZsdDRLT2l4cVJIQU1KODc0N0tPbW00?= =?utf-8?B?bFlWMS93RXVnR1BVTmp6aXhZaE8zdGYzeHZ2SjU4emJFelBlYy9jL203byt2?= =?utf-8?B?Z0hNU1duVUk5VC9icU9qNy9hYy80Y2VpaGVqUGR2YjNYdCt2ei83VEZEZTU2?= =?utf-8?B?UFBHUjdkbGVxQ3NFbjhGWThPeVpvUzdmWFhtZStyeS9WcDhVWGVGMzFXRmIw?= =?utf-8?Q?7MKR6Twn3oj3bD5SXOdLwttbPFtoRvB0=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; TYXPR0101MB0991; 6:mLtwlvWJ3grZzjMXjHOVXmKxoKrnuKL1XQElhhrgPJ7THvO1Q4n63zGTS2am9xNZNqFX+tCgZpdQIjOMxVhYeXLXji/O2cWh0MoA5WT7J65bJstOfB0w0hs+Yr6dArgdlN1UeSmc3jwnGcInbV9w/Zo2ZcHIcNiv4ARDJG6QVGMvzESgniH835EPQ7FCKo6bYNeOonT70whGDEDRky7pYnIushUYZ5nLmX/LPs6+VisDbPbwlmWKm/hET6MXRR5sn5ot3PjvQYaKaoCWqR7FMcZNJAkOa66vIawyTH/InD/BCe7fYnKj4TLm4djTAZe1gKyHgEqIeALYvxGWAYrjzA==; 5:RNGk1y+wcVwZDE3hBK5bE3HR9/oU9DUDxRBLOwQRbE19xXesITswD7tHgMGILsHYwFCyEAktdXLtP9zKGWlPndQEyZNYOquRRjenI9Z6YgZI3rcHmbq5tFPLBdSUoxhwXXztlnyAkCXGHoDdK1QRMg==; 24:2QXaPlO+HLt6j9ZbjI4Mlk6tGS65nnm9mG07P4QR2HzDqamcY12KaJUEf2MgA7MeD+EOVx4/wADhuuWJUDn+KxtEg3NucRWPWlch5QcB6KE= SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99 SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; TYXPR0101MB0991; 7:hhUjtJPVJScDXt25NjTu9HSPnRFD9JksY+BTO7tStFBFt6jXTWeX8lDcOflGV3cNXbmUm8omoGfx0zQWnKsi6vzsvV8Jvrvcx5Su4FbwdnTmjnYD+sXz+J36xp7IqPzgZ17NBq7VjTseP70nU5GyusMDGxHPqv/Hbbnen95xw/lUPABbVfDgD143Q/tcihncLJHnHYPF0lGIK6a1f6QcZEPI1CUlFxZP7EME0vQN5Dky254gpbijhkRZQga6SGt8KhfzPi9qcePFDynyGeLXGvpKik/Dp1+tbhAzKaqhiM/yX+SKPALq7I86UuZlirsDVN6RDSq+m0ENbF4iH0vnx9HwVtEaq/slo968bOGfM/c= X-OriginatorOrg: it.aoyama.ac.jp X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Oct 2016 00:41:44.1984 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: TYXPR0101MB0991 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:41:51 -0000 On 2016/10/28 00:33, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > On 10/27/2016 05:19 PM, Dean Willis wrote: >> Could one copy issue tracker and PR notifications to the mailing list? Or would that drive the list crazy? > It drives the list crazy. We have been doing that on > public-webrtc@w3.org for a few months now, and it has essentially > rendered the list silent except for the notifications - real mail gets > lost in the barrage of notifications. In the Internationalization WG of the W3C, we also had this problem, and changed it so that only the creation of an issue and the closing of an issue is reported to the mailing list (there's a separate archival mailing list to avoid the problems discussed at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2016Oct/0103.html). (Most if not all of the actual investigation and setup work has been and is done by Richard Ishida, the I18N Activity Lead.) The justification for this is that when the issue is created, you can subscribe to the github issue if you think you're interested, and you'll get a last chance to check how things went when the issue is closed. Also, there's some logic being put in place whenever we review the work of some other WG (which happens quite frequently given the nature of the group); some of their issues get an "I18N" tag, and some of the contributions to these issues are then sent to our mailing list. My personal impression is that this is certainly better than being swamped with all the contributions to each issue. However, it's still far from optimal. One example is that on github, the closure of an issue is a separate action from any commenting, so the mailing list just gets "this issue has been closed", without any indication as to how or why. One problem I see with github is that except for the subject line, there's absolutely no context in the messages. We have looked at e.g. including the previous comment in a "issue has been closed" message, but checking a few examples led to the conclusion that it wouldn't help too much. The main issue tracker system that I'm otherwise familiar with is redmine, as used at bugs.ruby-lang.org. That's in the context of software development, not spec development, but I'll mention a few points that I think are relevant anyway. Redmine always appends the full first contribution (i.e. the issue details). That can look quite redundant, and useless if the discussion goes on a tangent. But it's more of a context than just the subject line. Also, redmine allows to 'quote' earlier contributions on an issue. It's not impossible on github, but has to be done by hand. And because those who comment see the earlier comment in front of their eyes on the issue page, quoting is usually not found necessary. In summary, github essentially always expects you to go to the issue page. That may be part of their strategy (quite successful up to now) to get everything and everybody on github :-(. Regards, Martin. From nobody Thu Oct 27 19:26:04 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF4E129518 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:26:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0wpu9LxJASuk for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x232.google.com (mail-pf0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93E9E127735 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id n85so28174526pfi.1 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:26:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1VPXSlnXVd1uL4Zio9hl8asNGXmKGuX0ydQkjRtrMcY=; b=X2FTZtTHaN9j9cPSgBHIzOdn0qfvKh/1bUjA2Q/VfpeFQUyfULtlEnuHqUi58bnXzD Hp2KIqg+SLZ6CWSwqXrrlkBS9PJ6vF1x66szpHPfPCjjovKkoEcQQpqQlOW5OAy0gFVG ZC5Sapu/+XPKGl6PMqAhWnaTcn3TD7/PQXWBVVNYFp7WlfzdG6M2cXtP5M5zQV3LKJfA M6Bt7BQ8aVr4ZMLlKGGSzS2iuesBREBFh3vERI7Qw8qc1wV1GeQmhLJBK44HbrAWnAjI l1jjn7bgNBerCkFGRUlGXt/IK4Zr4q+md/7TnrD3sv76X0qWEUlFLWKvgjYAibM0grAi PvSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1VPXSlnXVd1uL4Zio9hl8asNGXmKGuX0ydQkjRtrMcY=; b=ixdk3+8RU89RZe4h4WCBTISGPCzFiVdK2Ex+5/2qUu8MtUKwtkOOTQIbMYcrRsYiLQ fIIhhsbxM2fzzk3X8o8bLWZcwJcBrJeZiWsZbTLt1IX4LnZAR00t3iT5bb4Ppsrj+CUG XVM7i98pq1C7VR7fuYEkuvxpBANDABDkcIu8y0nruzRQsDQzWhq1mE040zBIPOa3IAmp xer/xLINHyvFci4j4PW3LuHhsYG0uiN1ALIFnB72+/Cr0YzoUiCrP0M0BxXApwzq7o+R CY/Eo90DPJMAQqIrok0+79SE266lq/E+nYjQdxlm96Ti1UY7Hj1vRf2LuOYHipIpTX6w mpJg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcOZPfbbazEpvXd1w5ppUMRdTSlThjDt80w05hW5GWHNrfZu0YKBpxiG34OtNHOvQ== X-Received: by 10.98.51.134 with SMTP id z128mr20402198pfz.163.1477621562203; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:497c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:497c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e1sm14603031pap.11.2016.10.27.19.25.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT) To: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_J._D=c3=bcrst?= , Harald Alvestrand , ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <331986e0-b308-087d-1f4f-d32b074009d9@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:26:08 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:26:04 -0000 On 28/10/2016 13:41, Martin J. D=C3=BCrst wrote: > On 2016/10/28 00:33, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> On 10/27/2016 05:19 PM, Dean Willis wrote: >=20 >>> Could one copy issue tracker and PR notifications to the mailing list= ? Or would that drive the list crazy? >> It drives the list crazy. We have been doing that on >> public-webrtc@w3.org for a few months now, and it has essentially >> rendered the list silent except for the notifications - real mail gets= >> lost in the barrage of notifications. >=20 > In the Internationalization WG of the W3C, we also had this problem, an= d=20 > changed it so that only the creation of an issue and the closing of an = > issue is reported to the mailing list And that, it seems to me, might be a direct violation of IETF rules. BCP 25 (RFC 2418) makes it clear that discussions and decisions take place on the WG mailing list. Even if we regard github as a sort of design team activity, it must still be "subject to approval, rejection= or modification by the WG as a whole." So you can't say "we closed the foobar issue on github." You can say "github participants propose the following resolution of the foobar issue, does the WG agree?" But then you might have to repeat the whole discussion on the WG list. That's the price of democracy, IETF-style. Brian From nobody Fri Oct 28 02:45:05 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 405301293EB for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:45:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.352 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.352 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=netapp.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m6D2wYf5UYqo for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx141.netapp.com (mx141.netapp.com [216.240.21.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F35F129500 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:45:02 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,557,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="157989003" Received: from hioexcmbx02-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.122.105.35]) by mx141-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2016 02:39:51 -0700 Received: from VMWEXCCAS09-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.27) by hioexcmbx02-prd.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:39:58 -0700 Received: from NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.120.60.153) by VMWEXCCAS09-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:39:58 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netapp.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-netapp-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=zh4ioptc90AvYRXwb/SzKBU8ylnEkGOvYTXScZJOS+Y=; b=L+eAyOzzRAkNdlwTjWU/mRK7543ZdOHafZTtGPSkNz35QwVv/wpxTdBzPoO54wrF1RwvmHv5XSl1DBBEIAJskmILvCmo9krfIOmPl9hL7p3+Fhm7KrVpQ+N6a5Y8krXa5XYebOXc7uzDU0G+DkeyZfMzLl6VkNHGbZLEdIqkCJk= Received: from BN3PR0601MB1153.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.157.18) by BN3PR0601MB1155.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.157.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.669.16; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:39:55 +0000 Received: from BN3PR0601MB1153.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.157.18]) by BN3PR0601MB1153.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.157.18]) with mapi id 15.01.0679.015; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:39:55 +0000 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: Harald Alvestrand Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail Thread-Index: AQHSMEaWOytKya/oukie+oLHIbfjGaC8aloAgAAEDoCAAS+EAA== Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:39:55 +0000 Message-ID: <99DAFAD0-0C0A-41C3-A667-A8658B464FC3@netapp.com> References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251) authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=lars@netapp.com; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [131.159.215.22] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: fee80289-9652-4cd4-e8b5-08d3ff166024 x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN3PR0601MB1155; 7:U6fk/hOoD8CL2+ymlObu+E2a6r61fXLTkb1QJUps470Lyz5SlsXxLHLhiHW+5GxijAnmXFLzpQaA8egFAkcrQaoj5578J3zAfuODvNInkKnMiObiIv9L9S/Lzrd4FJsLZbnmmyzUvrr3rcTS/eTZX8bHFMnhfCPEWi+tvcXnzW9QKDu6Gaenb4RPhiDsR9Nh+vYRwGYUlelwk31joT1XxnKVjFKPgIjnmk2ivrljQFInBFc4oP7DQBaYTLDv4JqqAdRm2M2XDoDCo1RAA3pSZ/8slMWsVGEA5jE/9ri9Fitrpoe6qHjtuQ9Gp7FDF03uGP/ic/XWqkaUHUDAGpJ5SGtnQiBA4BxCkQ+PVrk8UBM= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN3PR0601MB1155; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(35073007944872); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040176)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(6042046)(6043046); SRVR:BN3PR0601MB1155; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN3PR0601MB1155; x-forefront-prvs: 0109D382B0 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(7916002)(189002)(377454003)(199003)(377424004)(24454002)(36756003)(110136003)(3660700001)(4326007)(86362001)(5002640100001)(6916009)(101416001)(50986999)(50226002)(230783001)(76176999)(5660300001)(8936002)(3280700002)(106356001)(105586002)(11100500001)(106116001)(4001150100001)(57306001)(99286002)(102836003)(586003)(93886004)(3846002)(68736007)(6116002)(8676002)(92566002)(87936001)(83716003)(122556002)(33656002)(19580395003)(81156014)(19580405001)(82746002)(81166006)(10400500002)(2900100001)(2906002)(2950100002)(97736004)(189998001)(77096005)(305945005)(7846002)(7736002)(66066001)(104396002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BN3PR0601MB1155; H:BN3PR0601MB1153.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: netapp.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1D54CB8C39F3BA4FA7907C072C4011D8@namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Oct 2016 09:39:55.4625 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 4b0911a0-929b-4715-944b-c03745165b3a X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN3PR0601MB1155 X-OriginatorOrg: netapp.com Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:45:04 -0000 On 2016-10-27, at 17:33, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > On 10/27/2016 05:19 PM, Dean Willis wrote: >> Could one copy issue tracker and PR notifications to the mailing list? O= r would that drive the list crazy? > It drives the list crazy. We have been doing that on > public-webrtc@w3.org for a few months now, and it has essentially > rendered the list silent except for the notifications - real mail gets > lost in the barrage of notifications. Could a second companion list be set up for the notifications? SO that the = people who don't want to be on github can subscribe to it and interact that= way? Lars= From nobody Fri Oct 28 02:55:27 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5320612951C for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:55:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SdNgt2ei3dHs for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:55:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06D461294CA for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:55:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.100] (unknown [124.189.98.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11FD122E1FA; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:55:14 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 20:55:10 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> To: Paul Kyzivat X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251) Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:55:24 -0000 > On 27 Oct. 2016, at 2:58 am, Paul Kyzivat = wrote: >=20 > Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to be following = what is going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged just = following the mailing list? Our intent is that someone can do any of: 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that = happened in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / = notifications 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github = comments) 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and making = pull requests) Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Fri Oct 28 03:07:00 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1FA5129A19 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:06:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uo9aTLmBiCFD for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:06:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yb0-x22d.google.com (mail-yb0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11256129A02 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:06:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id 205so17021048ybz.3 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:06:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=U1isDnIk1OVYa6qgy4y6eHHadmeBwioaOeSYgg4MDwA=; b=cAuhtIsflLhDhuCzrVuwtaTuKi+YrSQk7aFb/SxEj3vR/g6Mx1ptUJOD215SokeN1T FJeCver4TKpGW0FQDXJ4zDsz4KPQARNm1DNsmVdxRyp17Y0an9WvCh9sfsAmxxFMHBYn sBmJtxKGytgr9msm/ONPIuc1TpTmoJvhyM1ZRxD6OSobyneS9hfRU5P6hEUgOpOnx/b8 E4HMOHfa0jbYkceuQFhK3jOqCv/HxjowRhS00U69c4WP56elkjoei6Ma6mBuYxZJtmE5 RhtXjrHWsrGKAZ+LpX7+Z7ptr2yWQ/3CEFN6zO78vHRg1N+Vw8l785wkvvPcDsFcOQju L1xw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=U1isDnIk1OVYa6qgy4y6eHHadmeBwioaOeSYgg4MDwA=; b=IX7+sua1n7mP4Cek2G8If84kYY3qmuq3sH06bYR7AQLmBomN1aP/+KQabAJLHufsHT 5/tm00x2+eKSmYXEjWaahwWbrfquZL9juoZlTLlw8/7YiONUtCZtoTKK2uMgqEkpHvtZ EId7Ci3aSan8p6ME+i0SPEZHYoipWIWl6aPCdhlg92Nuj93AdUF5ppnjPOLAyofWukFP YN8grKojGN3uWp6G0jtJr2tpJ6PkA995DP5HAZ3TOi8iIkht34PzRcbutrFv8+aAP3XI v5MCzLpHWJ/EJQcUvnoCu8wgyFqs66osTnj1CFql3C4q5fashvagboy7FAXm+wRrOpB1 jvMA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdsjQ+pZV82RLugTgMOulkdJ2Z2Mqw5jj+yAz7kU1wYy5/tQq0jDndocpsHuj/A6BsNgetRgXIR6k93IA== X-Received: by 10.37.204.73 with SMTP id l70mr12173720ybf.161.1477649216318; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:06:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.82.210 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:06:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 21:06:15 +1100 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c07f302a4641a053fea045c Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Paul Kyzivat Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:06:59 -0000 --94eb2c07f302a4641a053fea045c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I think it's worth emphasizing that in the WGs I am involved in that use Github, people do regularly produce published drafts prior to IETF [0], so you can follow the work in the way you always have, namely by reading the drafts and commenting on-list. Historically we've given draft editors quite a bit of discretion in how they edit the draft, with WG review of each published version as a primary method of determining consensus. The primary impact of Github workflows, in my experience, has been to provide finer-grained validation of WG consensus (i.e., at the level of each pull request), and as Mark has indicated, the discussion of the general principle behind substantive changes usually happens on the list, with the details worked out in PRs. The result is that when the drafts are published they already mostly have broad consensus for the general principle and consensus of the Github-following population for the specific text. This seems strictly more transparent than the process we had before where editors mostly made the changes they thought were appropriate and then we validated them in meetings. -Ekr [0] And in some cases more regularly because the workflow tends to keep the documents in "always shippable" shape, so producing drafts is cheaper. On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > > On 27 Oct. 2016, at 2:58 am, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > > > > Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to be following > what is going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged just > following the mailing list? > > Our intent is that someone can do any of: > > 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that > happened in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / > notifications > 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github > comments) > 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and making > pull requests) > > Cheers, > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > --94eb2c07f302a4641a053fea045c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think it's worth emphasizing that in the WGs I am in= volved in that use Github,
people do regularly produce published drafts= prior to IETF [0], so you can follow
the work in the way you alw= ays have, namely by reading the drafts and commenting
on-list. Hi= storically we've given draft editors quite a bit of discretion in how t= hey
edit the draft, with WG review of each published version as a= primary method of
determining consensus.

The primary impact of Github workflows, in my experience, has been to pro= vide
finer-grained validation of WG consensus (i.e., at the level= of each pull request),
and as Mark has indicated, the discussion= of the general principle behind substantive
changes usually happ= ens on the list, with the details worked out in PRs. The=C2=A0
re= sult =C2=A0is that when the drafts are published they already mostly have b= road consensus
for the general principle and consensus of the Git= hub-following population for the
specific text. This seems strict= ly more transparent than the process we had before
where editors = mostly made the changes they thought were appropriate and then
we= validated them in meetings.

-Ekr

[0] And in some cases more regularly because the workflow tends to= keep the
documents in "always shippable" shape, so pro= ducing drafts is cheaper.


On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Mark No= ttingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> On 27 Oct. 2016, at 2:58 am, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to be following w= hat is going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged just followin= g the mailing list?

Our intent is that someone can do any of:

1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that happene= d in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / notifications=
2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github comment= s)
3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and making pul= l requests)

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/




____________________________= ___________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-github@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf= -and-github

--94eb2c07f302a4641a053fea045c-- From nobody Fri Oct 28 03:16:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F06E3129A38 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:15:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.631 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VvKh0T5i4YoT for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03B601294C3 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D0467C0B95 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:15:56 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j1-wQusrlzfv for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:15:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hta-hippo.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:1043:12:cd91:841c:213e:7be7]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EF6907C0B92 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:15:54 +0200 (CEST) To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> <99DAFAD0-0C0A-41C3-A667-A8658B464FC3@netapp.com> From: Harald Alvestrand Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:15:54 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <99DAFAD0-0C0A-41C3-A667-A8658B464FC3@netapp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:16:00 -0000 On 10/28/2016 11:39 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: > On 2016-10-27, at 17:33, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> On 10/27/2016 05:19 PM, Dean Willis wrote: >>> Could one copy issue tracker and PR notifications to the mailing list? Or would that drive the list crazy? >> It drives the list crazy. We have been doing that on >> public-webrtc@w3.org for a few months now, and it has essentially >> rendered the list silent except for the notifications - real mail gets >> lost in the barrage of notifications. > Could a second companion list be set up for the notifications? SO that the people who don't want to be on github can subscribe to it and interact that way? We did that for WEBRTC, before switching to "the list gets notified of new and closed issues". Only two persons ever subscribed. I can't explain that.... From nobody Fri Oct 28 03:18:54 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6DE8129A42 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:18:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.631 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4H0i7gcK0P_Z for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7ADCC129A38 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 03:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BBDE7C0B95 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:18:50 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xZhJYefQgCF0 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:18:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hta-hippo.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:1043:12:cd91:841c:213e:7be7]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 387C47C0B92 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:18:49 +0200 (CEST) To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <49a07efe-f622-e344-06bb-1371634c814a@alvestrand.no> From: Harald Alvestrand Message-ID: <1f997c89-39f2-adaf-8091-796489b681e5@alvestrand.no> Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:18:49 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:18:53 -0000 On 10/28/2016 02:41 AM, Martin J. Dürst wrote: > On 2016/10/28 00:33, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> On 10/27/2016 05:19 PM, Dean Willis wrote: > >>> Could one copy issue tracker and PR notifications to the mailing >>> list? Or would that drive the list crazy? >> It drives the list crazy. We have been doing that on >> public-webrtc@w3.org for a few months now, and it has essentially >> rendered the list silent except for the notifications - real mail gets >> lost in the barrage of notifications. > > In the Internationalization WG of the W3C, we also had this problem, > and changed it so that only the creation of an issue and the closing > of an issue is reported to the mailing list (there's a separate > archival mailing list to avoid the problems discussed at > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2016Oct/0103.html). > > (Most if not all of the actual investigation and setup work has been > and is done by Richard Ishida, the I18N Activity Lead.) > > The justification for this is that when the issue is created, you can > subscribe to the github issue if you think you're interested, and > you'll get a last chance to check how things went when the issue is > closed. We have done that in the WEBRTC WG and the Media Capture TF too, but it's still too many mails when the editors are active - check out the display here: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2016Oct/ All the messages that start with [mediacapture- are from github. Another problem we have is that we have branching issues - issues raised in other bugtrackers for other specs - in the mailing-list-only times, these would be CCed to both groups' mailing lists, but in the github times, there's no natural way to notify the WG that you're filing an issue on their behalf in someone else's github. The tagging stuff that i18n is doing may help there. From nobody Fri Oct 28 04:08:30 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2548129A95 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 04:08:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.132 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.132 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=akamai.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a_-S7Ys1MJ2i for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 04:08:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com [23.79.238.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C34129A96 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 04:08:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 544BD433412; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 11:08:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from prod-mail-relay10.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay10.akamai.com [172.27.118.251]) by prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31002433402; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 11:08:27 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1477652907; bh=U9JHNgRBj1bFecLtpcQ4JnMNsjfCS17cyk5GRpsDtU4=; l=406; h=From:To:CC:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=M2G5OkwmS0zteunmftNZSt/TAJccla6ogU44dSDQVsN5nzACp+EBYcZEDhDOxcc82 2DXCO12OFW1AaPeoESthXdgfxY8+vWUS0wj21e7bGc0mKgCTSUr56wqhNduGmi1XOi 9NDQrO/jWgpA/PGYbC30ZLQVDy4eUz1BfzufMGR4= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cas1.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-relay10.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 249401FCA1; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 11:08:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:08:26 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:08:26 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Mark Nottingham , Paul Kyzivat Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail Thread-Index: AQHSLyHRjlewYFP5CECH7x6bwmCTT6C6NXGAgAAGBICAAAEhAIAAWuYwgACAzQD//8kM8IAARwgAgAK/KgD//9FRoA== Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 11:08:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.34.217] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 11:08:30 -0000 > 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that happe= ned > in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / notifications > 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github > comments) > 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and making p= ull > requests) Not clear to me where you intend/want discussions to happen. From nobody Fri Oct 28 07:44:18 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796BA129B12 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:44:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.935 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.935 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5Thxc4XrNhZi for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:44:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABC3C129B09 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:44:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resomta-ch2-10v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.106]) by resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id 08NAcBq1Pff8q08ODcpubV; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:44:13 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.110] ([73.186.127.100]) by resomta-ch2-10v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id 08OCcGGaG6WYs08ODc1qeG; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:44:13 +0000 To: Eric Rescorla , Mark Nottingham References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: <6c148d62-1443-ae59-ece9-1d8d25c2c7b2@alum.mit.edu> Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:44:12 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfGnhFpB6XHYy+H067LO/ln37ZngmG7MqIygjyWiR9Adlbe3hh+SpHtfnLkQWjiZawhoq+sKScKf16g8EkxMk3xAFJUIB5532YKL7BhF6pSM9rSFP5zLg /InBk0DqqMEXhubNDkE77Qlewy9czqMY1ZFg8ipcUGMgTyMdFcdQCObtumCmp5+Iax2iSuuoP5Aze+RzZxH7L7UDqcKIZ/m5mZQxxyoEiRaQCRWG6IzY6Lpz Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:44:16 -0000 Ekr, Comment at end. On 10/28/16 6:06 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > I think it's worth emphasizing that in the WGs I am involved in that use > Github, > people do regularly produce published drafts prior to IETF [0], so you > can follow > the work in the way you always have, namely by reading the drafts and > commenting > on-list. Historically we've given draft editors quite a bit of > discretion in how they > edit the draft, with WG review of each published version as a primary > method of > determining consensus. > > The primary impact of Github workflows, in my experience, has been to > provide > finer-grained validation of WG consensus (i.e., at the level of each > pull request), > and as Mark has indicated, the discussion of the general principle > behind substantive > changes usually happens on the list, with the details worked out in PRs. > The > result is that when the drafts are published they already mostly have > broad consensus > for the general principle and consensus of the Github-following > population for the > specific text. This seems strictly more transparent than the process we > had before > where editors mostly made the changes they thought were appropriate and then > we validated them in meetings. What you describe seems reasonable to me, but one aspect of it seems likely to be controversial. In particular, there seems to be a difference of opinion on how editors are to decide the details of changes and then deliver them to the wg: 1) 1a) an issue is raised on the wg mailing list; 1b) it is discussed there until it is clear what change is needed; 1c) the editor describes the change in some detail on this list; 1d) the group agrees and the editor publishes a new version with that change. 1e) there are typically no surprises about whether the change is what the wg expected, except possibly minor editorial stuff. 2) 2a) an issue is raised on the wg mailing list; 2b) it is discussed until the editor says: "I can take it from here"; 2c) the editor then publishes a revised draft with his proposed text addressing the issue; 2d) then the wg discusses the new version; 2e) if necessary further issues are raised to "fix" it, or a decision is made to roll back the change. Personally I think both approaches have merit - it depends on the state of the document and the sorts of issues being considered. (For instance, changes that require major restructuring of the document really can't be done via (1).) But some people seem to have a near-religious attachment to (1). The way you describe using github seems to align with (2), but not so much with (1). Of course the situation is very different for *individual* documents. Before they come under wg control the authors can work together however they want. Thanks, Paul > -Ekr > > [0] And in some cases more regularly because the workflow tends to keep the > documents in "always shippable" shape, so producing drafts is cheaper. > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Mark Nottingham > wrote: > > > > On 27 Oct. 2016, at 2:58 am, Paul Kyzivat > wrote: > > > > Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to be following what is going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged just following the mailing list? > > Our intent is that someone can do any of: > > 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that > happened in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / > notifications > 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github > comments) > 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and > making pull requests) > > Cheers, > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > From nobody Fri Oct 28 12:39:30 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39C1F12940A for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:39:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HTViMf2iwcGw for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:39:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x22f.google.com (mail-pf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96A081204D9 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:39:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id e6so41899179pfk.3 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:39:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TTkfLpQKZMff6h2jAlVbe34ZEStjY22Wlc1/ep/DBMo=; b=BicWw3mwpNK5CbXvcHGuYkN8HpLbvKF4Zow1Y4ZdZROsIoo/D3sAGRl+5DscDp/RUs uUGpdipks2Gtv+KI8ZIL7cRrIj7BMoaYgdnpyHX2PmD04lEVS9AN2XfWbDlJevchCO1h sByfucPnh1YKnEuMr7boL4xsUfpibcWct68U+9Tyi4tDN4GVoT+e4lp3uMfE0ne+s8fa 6czd7vnsAlnth4VHS62n+Zd3lQoEgp6srfO6q1Q1h4epbf71l3gLloiCZiumYXSBrUGO GtskVSZXijXUpJ1xoe0X1oPvkGeZOSpOjhHkjwtQeYB7ZDYnAEAotRPfyYa0WoUiIxpU CVuw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=TTkfLpQKZMff6h2jAlVbe34ZEStjY22Wlc1/ep/DBMo=; b=Oww1Ee0sFiXN8tFr20qpc1clDTR70hLwBq4yQ7iOtTWSCVj39BUCNA0gXAIwFgSNqt l7qSSWL8K0PnI03E2bSN/I4RxVq1Ivy6VFbhlK7LEXizTDB67wmFRYaqmYFkZ8xVycD8 YMlTyxeeFthXw4UWcdXzI0D5Cw/l5cvtpyE+TqzAiZJrlTExi0pdmjWFu1OVDhfbn0LM 4QUVhDQMqlwKOKmAoB2GH8mvMXLQBLSreJHRWgN7jwYhRyY4JSQkSOw03s29e1gOMkBQ EgOO6zZ0Eaw4AxqAfYZLD7AeEoW7/1weJh4Mn/WIltV+35yrgpU9T+MXI47P0+hFMmiZ pCcw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfjO/Bt4xN26dlCfiJNv2x3vUyR7i45xyM7ihvjYhU/q3RG9NX21XtgPtP1Yndn0A== X-Received: by 10.99.216.21 with SMTP id b21mr19683199pgh.159.1477683566766; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:39:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:659e:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:659e:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e90sm20737430pfd.5.2016.10.28.12.39.25 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:39:26 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <5f55430d-af4b-2e5f-ef1f-0f4f9905e53d@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:39:35 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 19:39:29 -0000 On 29/10/2016 00:08, Salz, Rich wrote: > >> 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that happened >> in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / notifications >> 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github >> comments) >> 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and making pull >> requests) > > Not clear to me where you intend/want discussions to happen. And that's the point. Under IETF rules, if the discussion didn't happen on the WG mailing list, it didn't happen. So any discussion that only takes place on github (or any other tracker) doesn't count; it's just private chatter. Note, I'm not saying that private chatter isn't allowed during document development. I do it all the time. I'm just saying that it doesn't determine WG consensus and it can be ignored or overridden by the WG. There's nothing new here; github is just another tool. Brian From nobody Fri Oct 28 13:43:41 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5306129677 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:43:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w_rfqBm9BQsZ for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0A2E129676 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.116] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u9SKhZcH006559 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:43:36 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.116] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Brian E Carpenter" Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:43:35 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5f55430d-af4b-2e5f-ef1f-0f4f9905e53d@gmail.com> References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> <5f55430d-af4b-2e5f-ef1f-0f4f9905e53d@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263) Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 20:43:40 -0000 On 28 Oct 2016, at 12:39, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 29/10/2016 00:08, Salz, Rich wrote: >> >>> 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that >>> happened >>> in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / >>> notifications >>> 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github >>> comments) >>> 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and >>> making pull >>> requests) >> >> Not clear to me where you intend/want discussions to happen. > > And that's the point. Under IETF rules, if the discussion didn't > happen > on the WG mailing list, it didn't happen. So any discussion that only > takes place on github (or any other tracker) doesn't count; it's just > private chatter. > > Note, I'm not saying that private chatter isn't allowed during > document > development. I do it all the time. I'm just saying that it doesn't > determine > WG consensus and it can be ignored or overridden by the WG. There's > nothing > new here; github is just another tool. Nothing in the list above says "WG consensus". It is about what appears in a draft. There are plenty of examples of things appearing in drafts because someone asked for something, the author agreed, it went in, and the the WG says "no, take that out". I'm being specific here because you are equating a tool that allows people to see how a document develops better than they ever have as "private chatter". It's not private, and that's the point. Document development is not the same was WG consensus development, although they are clearly related. --Paul Hoffman From nobody Fri Oct 28 14:52:33 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22046129696 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:52:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2SLh5rNQylcE for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-x22d.google.com (mail-yw0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6A571294DB for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id w3so103837756ywg.1 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:52:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Wy6aS1caANld8zrvuLq2Dg6rYYA7XiYJeP4oA2qFN5M=; b=J3mIE6LhKrBudQSs/6mJBsgAGBL7vLdVDStkFWFOAu27F7uLU39oc7kfzusyGENbke jvEoy2xa4W/cIeV1GXiKYX142EZ6b/Hg/TT79n6GQKztQRsJf/rdBjc1cDbS6CXwdkS0 WvM2pf3xxiwj23to1hKFjNzVqfZ28QunxqhRsf/MoZdW+0JvhcU9uRvSTPaf/qRMK+Lj SwAO+nUiE+YWHKmz7D5F8T0UVdctktQqEgeRQkrdQ5BOunBfuvQD/vUerzMrDqSZFEr7 xJWb5v8peZPtALWrSjJk7C4DgSMr+n6g+3nYWM2QZ3GHKgfzeBMWOGLGtV8ly6vJ14CN pYsg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Wy6aS1caANld8zrvuLq2Dg6rYYA7XiYJeP4oA2qFN5M=; b=UCID9NDHLsTPns8nr9b4AY/ryV/CzoJUXELhWByY6HRPFOD/Mlx5VzLe9LZns2aZoc onsfiH4aPUXnIW6T13LGzqfIC91yrkefGpD5ES9TGw5/8TH3ve7rloMCNWx8SkBXIlPx rfaE+Yl0RY/Z8fMsCWTXbo2hKkDHTezIx8O0SsGpIrsypWCoHTKF2Yar1+9ZAUrTEAF4 vREUPvjyTynrP8fOZOiqF9vzGK5cYW2r2rYmRAt2OUMbG06bDU191/cR+vFCFBfGbTUS gtAYpqHRo8HwElX3wekrdSSpoAsNW9el3JugEl1xTpi80NEMpSwh+M7je71dDfyFgcGR dycw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcc1HrPewRV2LB3z5kDcbubGUwANmhFRIpn+pOdfgo/yhtmMtw88JvzzQZZeCbiHMvwGdZqmItqGx41KA== X-Received: by 10.129.78.71 with SMTP id c68mr8528901ywb.21.1477691548974; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:52:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.82.210 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:51:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6c148d62-1443-ae59-ece9-1d8d25c2c7b2@alum.mit.edu> References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> <6c148d62-1443-ae59-ece9-1d8d25c2c7b2@alum.mit.edu> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:51:48 +1100 Message-ID: To: Paul Kyzivat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114dac9cdd721c053ff3df18 Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 21:52:32 -0000 --001a114dac9cdd721c053ff3df18 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > Ekr, > > Comment at end. > > > On 10/28/16 6:06 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> I think it's worth emphasizing that in the WGs I am involved in that use >> Github, >> people do regularly produce published drafts prior to IETF [0], so you >> can follow >> the work in the way you always have, namely by reading the drafts and >> commenting >> on-list. Historically we've given draft editors quite a bit of >> discretion in how they >> edit the draft, with WG review of each published version as a primary >> method of >> determining consensus. >> >> The primary impact of Github workflows, in my experience, has been to >> provide >> finer-grained validation of WG consensus (i.e., at the level of each >> pull request), >> and as Mark has indicated, the discussion of the general principle >> behind substantive >> changes usually happens on the list, with the details worked out in PRs. >> The >> result is that when the drafts are published they already mostly have >> broad consensus >> for the general principle and consensus of the Github-following >> population for the >> specific text. This seems strictly more transparent than the process we >> had before >> where editors mostly made the changes they thought were appropriate and >> then >> we validated them in meetings. >> > > What you describe seems reasonable to me, but one aspect of it seems > likely to be controversial. In particular, there seems to be a difference > of opinion on how editors are to decide the details of changes and then > deliver them to the wg: > > 1) > > 1a) an issue is raised on the wg mailing list; > > 1b) it is discussed there until it is clear what change is needed; > > 1c) the editor describes the change in some detail on this list; > > 1d) the group agrees and the editor publishes a new version with that > change. > > 1e) there are typically no surprises about whether the change is what the > wg expected, except possibly minor editorial stuff. > > 2) > > 2a) an issue is raised on the wg mailing list; > > 2b) it is discussed until the editor says: "I can take it from here"; > > 2c) the editor then publishes a revised draft with his proposed text > addressing the issue; > > 2d) then the wg discusses the new version; > > 2e) if necessary further issues are raised to "fix" it, or a decision is > made to roll back the change. > > Personally I think both approaches have merit - it depends on the state of > the document and the sorts of issues being considered. (For instance, > changes that require major restructuring of the document really can't be > done via (1).) But some people seem to have a near-religious attachment to > (1). > They may have such an attachment, but I'm unaware of any IETF rules that require it. It's up to the WG. > The way you describe using github seems to align with (2), but not so much > with (1). > To the contrary. Github makes the first flow practical whereas before it was not (after having tried to do it many times). -Ekr > Of course the situation is very different for *individual* documents. > Before they come under wg control the authors can work together however > they want. > > Thanks, > Paul > > -Ekr >> >> [0] And in some cases more regularly because the workflow tends to keep >> the >> documents in "always shippable" shape, so producing drafts is cheaper. >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Mark Nottingham > > wrote: >> >> >> > On 27 Oct. 2016, at 2:58 am, Paul Kyzivat > > wrote: >> > >> > Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to be >> following what is going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged >> just following the mailing list? >> >> Our intent is that someone can do any of: >> >> 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that >> happened in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / >> notifications >> 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github >> comments) >> 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and >> making pull requests) >> >> Cheers, >> >> -- >> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >> >> >> >> > --001a114dac9cdd721c053ff3df18 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.e= du> wrote:
Ekr,

Comment at end.


On 10/28/16 6:06 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
I think it's worth emphasizing that in the WGs I am involved in that us= e
Github,
people do regularly produce published drafts prior to IETF [0], so you
can follow
the work in the way you always have, namely by reading the drafts and
commenting
on-list. Historically we've given draft editors quite a bit of
discretion in how they
edit the draft, with WG review of each published version as a primary
method of
determining consensus.

The primary impact of Github workflows, in my experience, has been to
provide
finer-grained validation of WG consensus (i.e., at the level of each
pull request),
and as Mark has indicated, the discussion of the general principle
behind substantive
changes usually happens on the list, with the details worked out in PRs. The
result=C2=A0 is that when the drafts are published they already mostly have=
broad consensus
for the general principle and consensus of the Github-following
population for the
specific text. This seems strictly more transparent than the process we
had before
where editors mostly made the changes they thought were appropriate and the= n
we validated them in meetings.

What you describe seems reasonable to me, but one aspect of it seems likely= to be controversial. In particular, there seems to be a difference of opin= ion on how editors are to decide the details of changes and then deliver th= em to the wg:

1)

1a) an issue is raised on the wg mailing list;

1b) it is discussed there until it is clear what change is needed;

1c) the editor describes the change in some detail on this list;

1d) the group agrees and the editor publishes a new version with that chang= e.

1e) there are typically no surprises about whether the change is what the w= g expected, except possibly minor editorial stuff.

2)

2a) an issue is raised on the wg mailing list;

2b) it is discussed until the editor says: "I can take it from here&qu= ot;;

2c) the editor then publishes a revised draft with his proposed text addres= sing the issue;

2d) then the wg discusses the new version;

2e) if necessary further issues are raised to "fix" it, or a deci= sion is made to roll back the change.

Personally I think both approaches have merit - it depends on the state of = the document and the sorts of issues being considered. (For instance, chang= es that require major restructuring of the document really can't be don= e via (1).) But some people seem to have a near-religious attachment to (1)= .

They may have such an attachment, but= I'm unaware of any IETF rules that require it. It's up to the WG.<= /div>


The way you describe using github seems to align with (2), but not so much = with (1).

To the contrary. Github makes= the first flow practical whereas before it was not (after having
tried to do it many times).

-Ekr


Of course the situation is very different for *individual* documents. Befor= e they come under wg control the authors can work together however they wan= t.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Thanks,
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Paul

-Ekr

[0] And in some cases more regularly because the workflow tends to keep the=
documents in "always shippable" shape, so producing drafts is che= aper.


On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net
 <mailto:mnot@mnot.net= >> wrote:


=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > On 27 Oct. 2016, at 2:58 am, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu = <mailto:pkyzi= vat@alum.mit.edu>> wrote:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to = be following what is going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged= just following the mailing list?

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Our intent is that someone can do any of:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of thing= s that
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 happened in Github through the drafts and on-list change summ= aries /
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 notifications
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from = Github
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 comments)
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting = and
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 making pull requests)

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Cheers,

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 --
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/




=C2=A0 =C2=A0 _______________________________________________
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Ietf-and-github mailing list
 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Ietf-and-github@ietf.org <mailto:Ietf-and-github@ietf.org>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/= listinfo/ietf-and-github>




--001a114dac9cdd721c053ff3df18-- From nobody Fri Oct 28 15:00:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B97EA129561 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:00:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nMuhz4l3hZhI for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEC1C1294DB for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:00:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.100] (unknown [124.189.98.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C0AA22E257; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 18:00:04 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <6c148d62-1443-ae59-ece9-1d8d25c2c7b2@alum.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 09:00:01 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4B1B8AB1-965E-4213-B20B-01B32708BEC2@mnot.net> References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> <6c148d62-1443-ae59-ece9-1d8d25c2c7b2@alum.mit.edu> To: Paul Kyzivat X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251) Archived-At: Cc: Eric Rescorla , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 22:00:24 -0000 FWIW - in httpbis, we use both approaches, depending on the situation. > On 29 Oct. 2016, at 1:44 am, Paul Kyzivat = wrote: >=20 > Ekr, >=20 > Comment at end. >=20 > On 10/28/16 6:06 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> I think it's worth emphasizing that in the WGs I am involved in that = use >> Github, >> people do regularly produce published drafts prior to IETF [0], so = you >> can follow >> the work in the way you always have, namely by reading the drafts and >> commenting >> on-list. Historically we've given draft editors quite a bit of >> discretion in how they >> edit the draft, with WG review of each published version as a primary >> method of >> determining consensus. >>=20 >> The primary impact of Github workflows, in my experience, has been to >> provide >> finer-grained validation of WG consensus (i.e., at the level of each >> pull request), >> and as Mark has indicated, the discussion of the general principle >> behind substantive >> changes usually happens on the list, with the details worked out in = PRs. >> The >> result is that when the drafts are published they already mostly = have >> broad consensus >> for the general principle and consensus of the Github-following >> population for the >> specific text. This seems strictly more transparent than the process = we >> had before >> where editors mostly made the changes they thought were appropriate = and then >> we validated them in meetings. >=20 > What you describe seems reasonable to me, but one aspect of it seems = likely to be controversial. In particular, there seems to be a = difference of opinion on how editors are to decide the details of = changes and then deliver them to the wg: >=20 > 1) >=20 > 1a) an issue is raised on the wg mailing list; >=20 > 1b) it is discussed there until it is clear what change is needed; >=20 > 1c) the editor describes the change in some detail on this list; >=20 > 1d) the group agrees and the editor publishes a new version with that = change. >=20 > 1e) there are typically no surprises about whether the change is what = the wg expected, except possibly minor editorial stuff. >=20 > 2) >=20 > 2a) an issue is raised on the wg mailing list; >=20 > 2b) it is discussed until the editor says: "I can take it from here"; >=20 > 2c) the editor then publishes a revised draft with his proposed text = addressing the issue; >=20 > 2d) then the wg discusses the new version; >=20 > 2e) if necessary further issues are raised to "fix" it, or a decision = is made to roll back the change. >=20 > Personally I think both approaches have merit - it depends on the = state of the document and the sorts of issues being considered. (For = instance, changes that require major restructuring of the document = really can't be done via (1).) But some people seem to have a = near-religious attachment to (1). >=20 > The way you describe using github seems to align with (2), but not so = much with (1). >=20 > Of course the situation is very different for *individual* documents. = Before they come under wg control the authors can work together however = they want. >=20 > Thanks, > Paul >=20 >> -Ekr >>=20 >> [0] And in some cases more regularly because the workflow tends to = keep the >> documents in "always shippable" shape, so producing drafts is = cheaper. >>=20 >>=20 >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Mark Nottingham > > wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> > On 27 Oct. 2016, at 2:58 am, Paul Kyzivat > wrote: >> > >> > Are all the participants on the mailing list assumed to be = following what is going on in github? Or can wg members be fully engaged = just following the mailing list? >>=20 >> Our intent is that someone can do any of: >>=20 >> 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things = that >> happened in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries = / >> notifications >> 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from = Github >> comments) >> 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and >> making pull requests) >>=20 >> Cheers, >>=20 >> -- >> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >> >>=20 >>=20 >=20 -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Fri Oct 28 15:01:15 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D54D12967B for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:01:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Udh66uZuImIX for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05279129481 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.100] (unknown [124.189.98.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2CE6322E1F3; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 18:01:10 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 09:01:10 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> To: "Salz, Rich" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251) Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Paul Kyzivat Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 22:01:14 -0000 > On 28 Oct. 2016, at 10:08 pm, Salz, Rich wrote: >=20 >=20 >> 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that = happened >> in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / = notifications >> 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github >> comments) >> 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and = making pull >> requests) >=20 > Not clear to me where you intend/want discussions to happen. See: https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Fri Oct 28 15:28:16 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBEC412965A for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:28:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ouvW78yyeGRQ for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:28:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x22b.google.com (mail-pf0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F718127ABE for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:28:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id n85so43882521pfi.1 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:28:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vYxU5S57xhedlEUWDBzayPvTsgwgImCppjmWJuH4fL4=; b=UHIQ27ZKgNiis0BSnL+krKC4PdzWywf3tTz8j8Th/WKvej3C7Poo+1prW2gVGtbffs R/5bqBB+Q3EuhxrbvZVP85sE2iN2ic4TCr9uamn/OkuQMFXIFvq5omi3En2FAn7/EvaI 88I3x1lC/l3pVm68R0FUA2QeE5UDdaP7IUmZk47+Xh/pdzvtt8QlPl+J32nsylktu5ai 9HK5mx0VMyqm3ar230v86A1LaBmm4Zgxw/7o0YF+RCleeOdxvmkI3QlXCGfNBizXwY/8 rvs5AMr1AzGZul37ENOMkQ57sQLD1g1WZ88ykeKvegqC6SDB5nUKaOCu1e+YY5ux5tbr +Ivg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=vYxU5S57xhedlEUWDBzayPvTsgwgImCppjmWJuH4fL4=; b=mq+V3PN1AOgrW+blswhvYC7QiWXKwPXohQ0Ku1BRM7/P/KnThoaXsIU7s0eYRJuQUv kdOj41xgEjoiJa+AXg2iKh71/qA3EkLb+5DQARmtuBPYIexWNX11WMPu6VvfYR23TitL VTJDdScDqvGo3BWMwB+K5PdKsDcNyhdajV5KUiA32AScrAM5O66KzSXiWrifERnBG5Hl KrRfjUN9qKOoVHkZfCGqao2nU734t4E7RlrxtnMsp6gT2RKThpCwhi+E2JmFi0RK21Ar exzz+TuDqUvkFyp7U7NIirSP/h4VFcRABj91TxTeLcwn7t7CR0Hc1LVEy/8ZK8icBmdN T3jQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfJdjT5LT6nA0cECcq9zDQZOo+y9ZhUiGfBcJJCzChMUDILD6ag+aLwSJt7vbv11w== X-Received: by 10.98.155.202 with SMTP id e71mr15018027pfk.166.1477693693855; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:28:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:659e:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:659e:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 74sm21066293pfp.77.2016.10.28.15.28.11 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:28:12 -0700 (PDT) To: Paul Hoffman References: <545C1283-C68E-4EB3-A65D-DC3C35B99FE3@imc.org> <95C0F289-DA22-4243-84F8-4C5C9D80B349@vpnc.org> <8CFDAD62-CF56-4FB1-BA3B-46B61104D915@softarmor.com> <1725D3B2-5818-4397-BAB1-C766794A0E59@vpnc.org> <5f55430d-af4b-2e5f-ef1f-0f4f9905e53d@gmail.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 11:28:21 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WG documents and pull requests, issues, and WG mail X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of using GitHub in IETF activities, particularly for Working Groups" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 22:28:16 -0000 On 29/10/2016 09:43, Paul Hoffman wrote: > On 28 Oct 2016, at 12:39, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > >> On 29/10/2016 00:08, Salz, Rich wrote: >>> >>>> 1) Just follow the WG mailing list, and become aware of things that >>>> happened >>>> in Github through the drafts and on-list change summaries / >>>> notifications >>>> 2) #1 + following the WG issues mailing list (generated from Github >>>> comments) >>>> 3) Just engage on Github (e.g., by filing issues, commenting and >>>> making pull >>>> requests) >>> >>> Not clear to me where you intend/want discussions to happen. >> >> And that's the point. Under IETF rules, if the discussion didn't >> happen >> on the WG mailing list, it didn't happen. So any discussion that only >> takes place on github (or any other tracker) doesn't count; it's just >> private chatter. >> >> Note, I'm not saying that private chatter isn't allowed during >> document >> development. I do it all the time. I'm just saying that it doesn't >> determine >> WG consensus and it can be ignored or overridden by the WG. There's >> nothing >> new here; github is just another tool. > > Nothing in the list above says "WG consensus". It is about what appears > in a draft. There are plenty of examples of things appearing in drafts > because someone asked for something, the author agreed, it went in, and > the the WG says "no, take that out". > > I'm being specific here because you are equating a tool that allows > people to see how a document develops better than they ever have as > "private chatter". It's not private, and that's the point. Document > development is not the same was WG consensus development, although they > are clearly related. Paul, in the IETF, if it isn't on the WG list (or in a minuted meeting), it *is* private, as far as the IETF process is concerned. That is very clear in RFC2418; the fact that some people find github to be a useful tool doesn't affect that. As far as I can see there is a complete analogy with a design team mailing list with a public archive: it's available to the WG, but design team decisions made on that list do not bind the WG. So, if the github users choose to cc the WG list on all issue traffic, the IETF rules apply, and everybody gets annoyed by the emails. If the github users don't cc the WG list, any decision made via github needs to be reported back to the WG - quite possibly by posting a new version of the draft, with a change log. That's all I'm trying to say: github changes nothing in IETF rules (unless we decide to update RFC2418). Brian