From nobody Mon Feb 6 05:04:16 2017 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 D57DB129D63 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 05:04:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 hqqGBkeN3a_y for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 05:04:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A6391294C3 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 05:04:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D57882CCFF; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:04:11 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nqUtg3DXfmEl; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:04:11 +0200 (EET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 603FF2CC9B; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:04:11 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_719AA2A3-7D9B-43C7-AE1D-84DF5EC57D52"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail From: Jari Arkko In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:04:10 +0200 Message-Id: References: <1A563B12-7FC1-4DB9-A262-30417DFEE82B@piuha.net> <4F24FC3F-EBBC-465A-B8AD-5AED28C3C8D9@netapp.com> To: Paul Hoffman , "Eggert, Lars" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Archived-At: Cc: "Ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] BOF or other things to do? 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: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 13:04:16 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_719AA2A3-7D9B-43C7-AE1D-84DF5EC57D52 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Hi again, I=92m trying to understand what useful thing we could do, and if there=92d be volunteers to do it. Assuming we had a meeting, I gather the agenda would look like working groups 1, 2, =85 presenting their way of working with GitHub for information to the participants in the room. And some discussion of the issues and opportunities=85 correct? Would I be correct in assuming there=92d be no discussion of trying to find one common way, or about writing permanent RFCs? Would such a meeting be preferred during the normal WG meeting hours or Sunday/evening/lunch slot? And if we did the above, who would the persons be who=92d speak about their WG experiences, and can I get a show of hands for people who would actually commit to talking about their WGs and experiences? Jari --Apple-Mail=_719AA2A3-7D9B-43C7-AE1D-84DF5EC57D52 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYmHRLAAoJEM80gCTQU46qWYgP/21BD6ej75T6j0AUAwS++SSa Kwl6dsy1xKjy7OPU5WomnzYz7+Fs2ga46KQaOr5OhdGLcNQ0DVeWPeUaz8Z3eTEF +J0yceLJ3OMDOOOHALX+ShGtbsSU/mdskILH0CZiJKHqP/nEjF+7cHZjuxsJLXY5 bM74aF1RANpHa8P0gm5Qt2b30YJwSRhrbz8DJDo/Lh1EYO7SHsOQ7neD4Hn/EdIS TyasWSoqfKz6oZumGO6qIVcR2E17GiOzdNValMjPSzIuWCo0qIUgvG+qAoZjHeDa ZawQFrViZj3NH91WKY4RaG8l7TMTUUPCikUblyl9xn49wS844MH1xsk0e0nfevm7 JPVWPPBFVD7NxIn0dMlIH0uLpiKCal6x55i5ErvqTXu10fBaFJp1JFgWBNjuy5Mr AtTvKwAgqcAfU/jCBreCCvDhIfu0glm/qMaJPm/GeWcs7cNNR1cn9vtJFKYlXv8Z E6UExZh0exxvfM0yBigvLKY+DJUsjB1MDA3YefaGbkPzE204nOUTReickogQXeny EhKkM7NW+zGwFLDWu50L3LnJmk/eniAjmdpLGAjx8eLQwvo4genhznoGzSs8/biS 6ekZyPxg35igIKo1tPIgwi1z20L4zgiApP41old6kjtPtk4M4neDJyQGf6muRk4/ HmcuBa3CPntKm/qSlVpn =le6s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_719AA2A3-7D9B-43C7-AE1D-84DF5EC57D52-- From nobody Mon Feb 6 07:49:39 2017 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 9E73F129E9A for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 07:49:38 -0800 (PST) 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 crxZfTNXN-Vq for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 07:49:37 -0800 (PST) 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 8311A129EA2 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 07:49:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.32.60.141] (142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id v16FmMUb011084 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:48:23 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176] claimed to be [10.32.60.141] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Jari Arkko" Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:49:32 -0800 Message-ID: <7473B2AB-DEBD-4531-87E6-361DA1E80AE2@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: References: <1A563B12-7FC1-4DB9-A262-30417DFEE82B@piuha.net> <4F24FC3F-EBBC-465A-B8AD-5AED28C3C8D9@netapp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5319) Archived-At: Cc: "Ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] BOF or other things to do? 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: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 15:49:38 -0000 On 6 Feb 2017, at 5:04, Jari Arkko wrote: > I’m trying to understand what useful thing we could do, and > if there’d be volunteers to do it. > > Assuming we had a meeting, I gather the agenda would look like > working groups 1, 2, … presenting their way of working with GitHub > for information to the participants in the room. And some discussion > of the issues and opportunities… correct? Would I be correct in > assuming there’d be no discussion of trying to find one common > way, or about writing permanent RFCs? I certainly hope so for "my WG's way of doing things" and certainly hope not for "finding one common way". I also hope that there is discussion of how to capture GitHub activity in the WG mailing lists for people who later want to see how decisions were made. I also hope that we get at least a few people who can say "my WG uses GitHub this way and I find these particular things difficult" so that we can discuss how to make some specific GitHubisms easier. > Would such a meeting be preferred during the normal WG > meeting hours or Sunday/evening/lunch slot? I proposed an actual BoF (during normal WG meeting hours) instead of a bar BoF to make it easier for the most people to attend. > And if we did the above, who would the persons be who’d speak > about their WG experiences, and can I get a show of hands for > people who would actually commit to talking about their > WGs and experiences? In the draft, Lars added a bunch of text about QUIC, and Carsten added a bunch of text about CoRE. We might get folks from HTTPbis and TLS, who have both been quite wedded to the tooling. I can talk a bit about using GitHub for one document (draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis) in a WG that has not used GitHub much before this and generally dislikes tooling of any sort. --Paul Hoffman From nobody Mon Feb 6 08:29:46 2017 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 282B8129439 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:29:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.702 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 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=-0.001, 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 1uk-Pi038I1R for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:29:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com [23.79.238.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4025F129F06 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:29:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 463B94336EB; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 16:29:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from prod-mail-relay11.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay11.akamai.com [172.27.118.250]) by prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 303854336DE; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 16:29:43 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1486398583; bh=I176umn/t2AH7LAijXeASTyfm3MIAhqiE99ow43iMgY=; l=396; h=From:To:CC:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=jtSPk/ztYaV6ceqIuzFuE8I6zZyJHmEyOh2nbbVJByAJIbiRLCXoLKZJX6wQMRRDg JRz7I7uOmnK3ihrv0sVPSi3waOORYs80DgthYsblin/+q8CobNR4W/k+tkqabT5v6r /RQvacY3dh6dDE8pENzxiebeFu0BMhVUtjOAuek4= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cas2.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.31]) by prod-mail-relay11.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CFB81FC8B; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 16:29:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb2.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 11:29:42 -0500 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; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 11:29:42 -0500 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Paul Hoffman , Jari Arkko Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] BOF or other things to do? Thread-Index: AQHSewvwitZmDAMuK0mSJCwNLY2rTaFSnn2AgABnxQCACUp6AIAALjQA//+3JzA= Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 16:29:41 +0000 Message-ID: <665cdd761df34fedbf1d82f255a25275@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> References: <1A563B12-7FC1-4DB9-A262-30417DFEE82B@piuha.net> <4F24FC3F-EBBC-465A-B8AD-5AED28C3C8D9@netapp.com> <7473B2AB-DEBD-4531-87E6-361DA1E80AE2@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: <7473B2AB-DEBD-4531-87E6-361DA1E80AE2@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: [172.19.34.114] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "Ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] BOF or other things to do? 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: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 16:29:45 -0000 PiBJIGFsc28gaG9wZSB0aGF0IHRoZXJlIGlzIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gb2YgaG93IHRvIGNhcHR1cmUg R2l0SHViIGFjdGl2aXR5IGluIHRoZQ0KPiBXRyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3RzIGZvciBwZW9wbGUgd2hv IGxhdGVyIHdhbnQgdG8gc2VlIGhvdyBkZWNpc2lvbnMgd2VyZSBtYWRlLg0KDQpIYXZpbmcgd3Jp dHRlbiBhIGZldyBHSCBob29rcyByZWNlbnRseSwgSSBjYW4gc2VlIGhvdyBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBy ZWFzb25hYmxlIHRvIGF1dG9tYXRlIHRoaXMgYXQgdGhlIElFVEYgaG9zdHMsIGZvciBleGFtcGxl Lg0K From nobody Thu Feb 9 23:28:27 2017 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 B00A612989F for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 23:28:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.921 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.921 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_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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=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 Qebxf9UZZHaN for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 23:28:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx142.netapp.com (mx142.netapp.com [216.240.21.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09B9D1298A1 for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 23:28:23 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,139,1484035200"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="170496324" Received: from vmwexchts04-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.122.105.32]) by mx142-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 09 Feb 2017 23:20:20 -0800 Received: from VMWEXCCAS10-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.28) by VMWEXCHTS04-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 23:27:42 -0800 Received: from NAM03-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.120.60.153) by VMWEXCCAS10-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 23:27:41 -0800 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=1FiqqDySrxTjK+2o3+DOK982H3RuUSpCTqKuNtaUZjo=; b=dviJEkYDdTs7U3FXKkr/jUefD14Frw77yXJMFMYJPewy0HNyYsohOPgzHRxowqoedM3iTHrxtLPn56Vn4BFopW06SjJKb/JV4xMc0yg0m/VohCNu5qT/3iY4SPUq2qmEce73ENoT/PayydJsnBicrwcYW6Ty7x0DUI491Q7UfX4= Received: from BN3PR0601MB1153.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.157.18) by BN3PR0601MB1156.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.157.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.888.16; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 07:27:41 +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 15.01.0888.026; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 07:27:40 +0000 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: "Ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: License File for Open Source Repositories Thread-Index: AQHSgwZSABllFITR3E21yz/LNaLLMg== Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 07:27:40 +0000 Message-ID: References: <148666659898.520.9969536143842941016.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=lars@netapp.com; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [2001:a61:3192:7401:b0ec:6f1c:1933:99da] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: acb8eb28-eda6-4974-7786-08d451864bd7 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001); SRVR:BN3PR0601MB1156; x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN3PR0601MB1156; 7: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 x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(166708455590820); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(102415395)(6040375)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026)(6041248)(20161123560025)(20161123562025)(20161123555025)(20161123558025)(20161123564025)(6072148); SRVR:BN3PR0601MB1156; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN3PR0601MB1156; x-forefront-prvs: 0214EB3F68 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(7916002)(39450400003)(189002)(199003)(106356001)(101416001)(2906002)(106116001)(97736004)(6506006)(189998001)(6436002)(6116002)(57306001)(77096006)(6486002)(102836003)(25786008)(2351001)(33656002)(5640700003)(6306002)(36756003)(561944003)(6512007)(54896002)(236005)(2473003)(99286003)(606005)(3660700001)(7906003)(7736002)(8936002)(5660300001)(50986999)(122556002)(3280700002)(31430400001)(81166006)(86362001)(81156014)(68736007)(8676002)(76176999)(53936002)(99936001)(110136004)(83716003)(2501003)(229853002)(92566002)(82746002)(38730400002)(2900100001)(50226002)(6916009)(450100001)(105586002)(24704002)(104396002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BN3PR0601MB1156; 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: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_71D4DBF3-F6CA-430C-B71C-C042A1AC7034"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Feb 2017 07:27:40.1308 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 4b0911a0-929b-4715-944b-c03745165b3a X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN3PR0601MB1156 X-OriginatorOrg: netapp.com Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Fwd: License File for Open Source Repositories 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, 10 Feb 2017 07:28:25 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_71D4DBF3-F6CA-430C-B71C-C042A1AC7034 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F5792E37-E349-4C58-8EE5-945530F2AEC0" --Apple-Mail=_F5792E37-E349-4C58-8EE5-945530F2AEC0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Begin forwarded message: >=20 > From: The IESG > Subject: License File for Open Source Repositories > Date: February 9, 2017 at 19:56:38 GMT+1 > To: "IETF Announcement List" > Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org >=20 > Many working groups work with open source > repositories, even for their work on specifications. >=20 > There are areas where there=E2=80=99s some need to integrate the > repository world and the IETF process. For instance, it is > helpful to have a standard boilerplate for repositories with respect > to the usual copyright and other matters. The intent is for such > text to be placed in a suitable file (e.g., =E2=80=9CLICENSE=E2=80=9D = or > "CONTRIBUTING=E2=80=9D) either for the whole repository or for an > affected directory under the repository. There=E2=80=99s likely some = other > similar information that is already present in these files in > many repositories. The idea is that people should treat, e.g., text > contributions to a draft-foo.xml in a repository much in the same way > as they treat text contributions on the list, at least when it comes = to > copyright, IPR, and other similar issues. >=20 > On December 23, 2016, the IESG called for feedback > on an early proposal for such standard boilerplate text. > The IESG has now taken into account the feedback > received, and makes the text at end of the this > email as the currently official version. >=20 > People creating new repositories can take advantage > of templates developed in the community, which among > other things include the standard boilerplate language. > One such template is here: >=20 > = https://github.com/martinthomson/i-d-template/blob/master/template/CONTRIB= UTING.md >=20 > We also want to point out that the boilerplate text represents what > one should minimally include, but in many cases there is a benefit > to including pointers to working groups, drafts, and so on as well. > Adding such text is obviously possible, at the discretion of the > creators of the repository in question. >=20 > Official boilerplate text: >=20 > This repository relates to activities in the Internet Engineering Task > Force(IETF). All material in this repository is considered = Contributions > to the IETF Standards Process, as defined in the intellectual property > policies of IETF currently designated as BCP 78 > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp78), BCP 79 > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp79) and the IETF Trust Legal > Provisions (TLP) Relating to IETF Documents > (http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html). >=20 > Any edit, commit, pull request, issue, comment or other change made to = this > repository constitutes Contributions to the IETF Standards Process > (https://www.ietf.org/). >=20 > You agree to comply with all applicable IETF policies and procedures, > including, BCP 78, 79, the TLP, and the TLP rules regarding code > components (e.g. being subject to a Simplified BSD License) in > Contributions. >=20 --Apple-Mail=_F5792E37-E349-4C58-8EE5-945530F2AEC0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

Begin forwarded message:

From: = The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: = License File for = Open Source Repositories
Date: = February 9, 2017 at 19:56:38 = GMT+1
To: = "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Reply-To: = ietf@ietf.org

Many working groups work with = open source
repositories, even for their work on = specifications.

There are areas where = there=E2=80=99s some need to integrate the
repository = world and the IETF process. For instance, it is
helpful to = have a standard boilerplate for repositories with respect
to= the usual copyright and other matters. The intent is for such
text to be placed in a suitable file (e.g., =E2=80=9CLICENSE=E2= =80=9D or
"CONTRIBUTING=E2=80=9D) either for the whole = repository or for an
affected directory under the = repository. There=E2=80=99s likely some other
similar = information that is already present in these files in
many = repositories. The idea is that people should treat, e.g., text
contributions to a draft-foo.xml in a repository much in the = same way
as they treat text contributions on the list, at = least when it comes to
copyright, IPR, and other similar = issues.

On December 23, 2016, the IESG = called for feedback
on an early proposal for such standard = boilerplate text.
The IESG has now taken into account the = feedback
received, and makes the text at end of the = this
email as the currently official version.

People creating new repositories can take = advantage
of templates developed in the community, which = among
other things include the standard boilerplate = language.
One such template is here:

https://github.com/martinthomson/i-d-template/blob/master/templ= ate/CONTRIBUTING.md

We also want to = point out that the boilerplate text represents what
one = should minimally include, but in many cases there is a benefit
to including pointers to working groups, drafts, and so on as = well.
Adding such text is obviously possible, at the = discretion of the
creators of the repository in = question.

Official boilerplate text:

This repository relates to activities in the = Internet Engineering Task
Force(IETF). All material in = this repository is considered Contributions
to the IETF = Standards Process, as defined in the intellectual property
policies of IETF currently designated as BCP 78
(https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp78), BCP 79
(https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp79) and the IETF Trust = Legal
Provisions (TLP) Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html).

Any edit, commit, pull request, issue, comment = or other change made to this
repository constitutes = Contributions to the IETF Standards Process
(https://www.ietf.org/).

You = agree to comply with all applicable IETF policies and procedures,
including, BCP 78, 79, the TLP, and the TLP rules regarding = code
components (e.g. being subject to a Simplified BSD = License) in
Contributions.


= --Apple-Mail=_F5792E37-E349-4C58-8EE5-945530F2AEC0-- --Apple-Mail=_71D4DBF3-F6CA-430C-B71C-C042A1AC7034 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYnWtpAAoJEFS1wwm/cMFXJ7kQAIP7QdMkgFmASXBjHL7DMKV5 YWbzTLRG9UFyXKtFztr8pfF7bYPCDTx4vQ+O0RVhejUvNOkftr/XvapAJ3Tk/dUR Zj5w/pZM29RmDM03D46U+ACL85/+djS+zQPVBn0Cs3FTdiYi2A5CftbL5TxZD1rl xzvRkL2nI5ISfH2oekRKF4n7uzE5e+AJTqdPX6V9oyb2eW/oQjnZZoqnYF1jTv7f ROrGtvAKHxswyxkVygTibl3zgONvKct7eBDGSfxPUeeOgvumzfYdx3yvaMhfnUPZ Nz5xhQZw/cBeap1DlF+zqTkSILAiATIZSxSRL7jfPzd1xUam5ibqTyoJcVyrN+Fn idwK3wkZAy0+iaRQ5XCP3EhtZ/dTkSp1Dm/P3I6riPPpOQ8SIPVK+PNPEDDqbA1N c7iMOYwXn7YcDg8JpTb5pEDuTOM31ZYW07/LAVLbpF3iWE/4qijuhEVWqrHyAe8w c/OIobPF8rZHYZsXowBFIutNGPVrop+dWLJsA/D9qVK89YusI4ZfJLRHKvHHjrt6 0DiPp+NyLOaiiknG7Kvo7Nh3vBUa4YhJnBD80QcW20xk8PSlepT/YnvR5zqOycaM OGCB+sCzOGt902p6gSTKQ+40Qw8D2uPhs5q0Nh5GjVOVv797oaAPp+XGNrEUYNrv Oq98uFMYHZqNDhrhsl7J =df47 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_71D4DBF3-F6CA-430C-B71C-C042A1AC7034-- From nobody Tue Feb 14 17:29:30 2017 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 1C738129493 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:29:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 l5H7Q5G8WDSM for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:29:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A94ED129404 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:29:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE21C2CFDC for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 03:29:26 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VDU61MphYo4e for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 03:29:26 +0200 (EET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D02B2CEB1 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 03:29:25 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D4130FB7-FD00-4C4E-9EF3-4C4646FF8468"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail From: Jari Arkko In-Reply-To: <665cdd761df34fedbf1d82f255a25275@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:29:24 -0800 Message-Id: References: <1A563B12-7FC1-4DB9-A262-30417DFEE82B@piuha.net> <4F24FC3F-EBBC-465A-B8AD-5AED28C3C8D9@netapp.com> <7473B2AB-DEBD-4531-87E6-361DA1E80AE2@vpnc.org> <665cdd761df34fedbf1d82f255a25275@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> To: "Ietf-and-github@ietf.org" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] session at IETF98? 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, 15 Feb 2017 01:29:29 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_D4130FB7-FD00-4C4E-9EF3-4C4646FF8468 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 I just wanted to update people on where my head is today wrt this topic. Tomorrow the IESG (and IAB) have to decide what to do with various BOF proposals. Honestly I=92m a bit on the fence about what to do here. I=92m leaning on approving a 1 hour slot and expecting that we can = recruit some of the key people to give an overview of what they=92re doing in their WGs. And getting that document written. I=92m also leaning on focusing the session more on letting the github people learn from each other more than target this as a general purpose education session. There would have been other alternatives too, like a Sunday session (but attendance may be difficult for some), or bar (but I think this is = a topic that we should get to discuss in the IETF properly). Thoughts? Jari --Apple-Mail=_D4130FB7-FD00-4C4E-9EF3-4C4646FF8468 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYo670AAoJEM80gCTQU46qFYwP/3ANMICR3+36ahN/bWX3iVOQ i8rG2CT1JxNl2k1uKCC6iA3ZV6wGtIq46ccOTJJ7ooCM3nco62/qL/5GAmu8WKfx p9EoOc5IXbFXzm2pihDL6h67222lzULFNcOHiMDSt2HHLvl/FI8x2Ie/1Mz2hWKi BrYaCCJEKYrmRte/V5oBqY6o0xHYEjip6HX6lHUVeuw49ziAv7O/w8Ypd7AMUgKv vu0cJt0tprwtcHUr+z4Jav72gypkaAVgYm9/LLjSamYbg/jf4kcLmReHpCfP/Otc OEaOY9SdQ73r/jcbAbaqI1/u+1LpQ1o+ooPM/wyfSJDkoI24H9kh+GRRgMLIapTs pw43I2+EigKmzDZ+PsdttsIWS6UdaBHItl5expMe2AOJnb8b1cckC33UIgCgx1bH nHF+cOoAMBf8pqm9oaUtJXmSKtONDQUAqNs3gNFCmtHO9hw3R5QhWKkS36mXAB1f gscNdX7XvtCOeUI2eU0ErW+CemT1HuH2UDLsFOd358/lRsEJC8lP9WPiE9cAOxGz orY4wN1ruZ2IETRZJ4Kt+o5KU0AMsiyly4TpEdOVvc7pLhhK4N6j2+Dl03SuyWEI 1bPhF21fjchgrB6az2ssL+yLuUJ8/mi4mluPSA9vfF1DXzeZrXDaBQ/5WW4SEMer YUUcub69sXPYzLljf7Vf =+Ws8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_D4130FB7-FD00-4C4E-9EF3-4C4646FF8468-- From nobody Wed Feb 15 11:08:09 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2D941296F8; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:08:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Meeting Session Request Tool\"" To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.43.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <148718568782.28254.3699176259957190802.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:08:07 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: jari.arkko@piuha.net, cmorgan@amsl.com, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, wugh-chairs@ietf.org Subject: [Ietf-and-github] wugh - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 98 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 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, 15 Feb 2017 19:08:08 -0000 A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Cindy Morgan, on behalf of the wugh working group. --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: WGs Using GitHub Area Name: General Area Session Requester: Cindy Morgan Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 1 Hour Number of Attendees: 100 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: dnsop, tls, httpbis, core, trans, quic, rtcweb, webpush, mtgvenue, lmap, dispatch, netvc, regext, stir, acme, hrpc, perc, saag, cbor People who must be present: Jari Arkko Alissa Cooper Resources Requested: Special Requests: --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Fri Feb 17 14:52:28 2017 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 5C6BE129C40 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:52:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 eujn5sVEIxoS for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:52:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::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 68CFA129420 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:52:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id p22so57410178qka.0 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:52:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=iE1HNKGb6j1dR8Xk98pw7Ea+avqvty4LwFE8CjnV7kI=; b=uZ1/fhrTGtdm0qdidSRYX8vlb6wk9pgUmBxxhqD4AOf/fny/0Piw8H2N9S1Dp0C9e4 3YJqij3cYyWv2tjq4x13EkmC95OS9Kf7RinSXdHHH9stnrKx8xgapnDx1V/ym9fdFbP1 VdB6J2R/HFtIyqi+IziqZjL1rFbHGBz8xxklMtmThkQPwm0aiBS3Z5XpaSk9j/BoE4dT RAU4QLsUd/WRNmbfXZWnIgxYh+WndZDcuPsIfp8NwOqNKB3gce5EqZ5wvvrcNmuWgzdg tXohZnJW1IOFMsgiyXWkmsc0C5jieOz6mdHtefjFD6mWB/78KGQ7eniIBHWhpGZgno5n lLLQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=iE1HNKGb6j1dR8Xk98pw7Ea+avqvty4LwFE8CjnV7kI=; b=ET6WAIUp7x2LXGC0SAFJUzINxok/E5LUWKlD5HTENDnUxXSFvtWFC2XI4uOTkEZN5M otsmMHU7cR1IF8URdE+/ws9cjHHAsWYk38nmeoBEfeNWea63mdxk4epznI5KMFSUU4uA bQccl0mkRFlPtm1L7522dHPSrpqNMBzJXxqmraTio/clYsENOEEtgNJmtk5AF8MdC8cf +Sc6qEuJ+3R+a/l4v2m4rcogw3hABEa7jSzZSFQo0Fnw9vJJEWgJmOCrgEMHleQKJ9DB nZUOnGPz2N3Z+LRGMfS/KOTJRcri8dxfaxF1PHnFaLRBwjNLytbH/xEBR/NfX1RLjESx K1BA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lnuiILMSe0HPk89HY+OkAw6d6JOMVJF4nqG8ISdJaUngzMxImKHeX1+xY69CdqODCsmMh/2nrdwMyaWw== X-Received: by 10.55.200.217 with SMTP id t86mr10278040qkl.5.1487371944307; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:52:24 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.19.112 with HTTP; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:52:23 -0800 (PST) From: Martin Thomson Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2017 09:52:23 +1100 Message-ID: To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 17 Feb 2017 22:52:27 -0000 Alia and I were discussing the proposed "BOF" for Chicago. It was apparent that lack of something concrete to talk about was the main reason we were having second thoughts about having the meeting. We decided to remove that uncertainty, which made the decision about whether to have the meeting much easier. Thus, it appears as though we will have a short meeting AND we now have something to argue about. Obviously, this is very drafty right now, but better to get the feedback cycle started early. See: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-github-bcp Contrary to all expectations, the draft is also on GitHub: https://github.com/unicorn-wg/github-bcp From nobody Tue Feb 21 14:32:59 2017 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 8FC96129D6B for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:32:58 -0800 (PST) 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 bUwqYPcsdxEI for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:32:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com [23.79.238.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7783129D59 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:32:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B2D9433416; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:32:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from prod-mail-relay11.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay11.akamai.com [172.27.118.250]) by prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0537B43340B; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:32:53 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1487716373; bh=pivxBEw+QLs95stvaWo7ujfbzidWbR02tWQmMIG787A=; l=297; h=From:To:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZO4T/Ukzf+WPogQRiNdYm7HWA2hXBggd6uCin1qJkuRouuZQlFI7ALJvMDvLyBYlo 6ZSxZ/dOXQhlPUtg5QQqJ50UfopexO3sCoLaeXnYTCqilQ80NR1pewU5ycgf7GGC4G qiymB/U2Y2lUUWxYh4y1wC48qg3EkTDxz/SBN2sE= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-casadmn.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.33]) by prod-mail-relay11.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA2101FC88; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:32:52 +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; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:32:52 -0500 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; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:32:52 -0500 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage Thread-Index: AQHSiXCFHf1qe6yyYESLk8sls5SD46F0EYqw Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:32:51 +0000 Message-ID: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> References: 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: [172.19.33.178] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 21 Feb 2017 22:32:58 -0000 =20 > See: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-github-bcp >=20 > Contrary to all expectations, the draft is also on GitHub: > https://github.com/unicorn-wg/github-bcp Not bad. I liked section 9. I would like to see more text about GitLab, too. I know at least openpgp u= ses it. From nobody Tue Feb 21 21:11:38 2017 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 4DD831295EF for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:11:37 -0800 (PST) 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 a4--OTN-wEfg for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:11:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qt0-x235.google.com (mail-qt0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::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 EDB9F1295EC for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:11:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt0-x235.google.com with SMTP id x35so555765qtc.2 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:11:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=On3UDl8j7D4SZ/QsLVVSFgmmfRgKv7abBq+ia+j9+Gc=; b=as6JG6EivrCj0BayNjU0jCzAHrQf6s8A2BsB7BjYsXTofHWtXxq8m16KBIDK9MrTbF pKZZ8dCFzmFazwWFZn3nv/faEU0UymQcjI3NFXzvKc8B0YqDPIJHCkO36PYtYpL0dG2U yMe3BM5GUYBnwCFgmoHFZ4gCiOPmx5yqHw6dwWSth8I9rXAw+Jni9cD05CPZN3PHqs7b bMEwr8Em8/W+LvynZNaXZC0NE3v1dO4jHytLppZdgzTzElQM2azZuN2TSZJB/VGuL0pd VAxV09iGzmSkgXjY8YRyB7GdmX+3FGcNDfVFu6jUof0whVqCRpI9TNZ5UFYnS+NCLpLR 0lFA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=On3UDl8j7D4SZ/QsLVVSFgmmfRgKv7abBq+ia+j9+Gc=; b=pQBfFSGfhVUkvA/8Z2lTn3E+JqzIv1TndNKcYoOSZ/C8A7CD6PcKj67+ZcpymIfXAr Npil1v6FrpIDG0fz40Ehj5jz6ppbKaH1oB+1BPCiv4m0eja0sa5hYTgiTSsKVtoE8LH5 39Gje5/3/RX3sm9L+UFJb1XvYtrTmeQquSbVJVz1fk8zPDU51quucYo2cBabAz1xSt2v U9/0upBsdkQy2ShUqOniCghL7c38p7DiGgojhbifGOAOwXBBIDOPd1Ql3aL5t7v4uMhX ie7mKh91kEVrARG8Qh3fPQTEBJh37IbKnA3fwerZFMVCZu2f/weNo56FKuTdvhAh7dJg Z7oQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mbKBexQp5hjWVVEiOWzjKHasPWs5fzy0pF0+IIGX0+dDEy3DUFU6Lxg0ej2TLN0IHnKnUtcTrIHMQOAw== X-Received: by 10.200.3.214 with SMTP id z22mr17626496qtg.3.1487740295224; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:11:35 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.19.112 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:11:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> From: Martin Thomson Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:11:34 +1100 Message-ID: To: "Salz, Rich" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 05:11:37 -0000 On 22 February 2017 at 09:32, Salz, Rich wrote: > I would like to see more text about GitLab, too. I know at least openpgp uses it. I don't know how you see ACME benefiting from its use of GitHub, but I have seen the benefits from reaching existing GitHub users. Though GitLab is quite good, installing our own copy of anything wouldn't end up with us gaining access to GitHub users. From nobody Tue Feb 21 22:15:22 2017 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 165EE12963D for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:15:21 -0800 (PST) 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 FyrHPSiFu1s5 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:15:18 -0800 (PST) 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 AB32B12963C for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:15:18 -0800 (PST) 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 124AF22E256; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 01:15:14 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:15:11 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Martin Thomson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 06:15:21 -0000 I feel like this wants to be two documents, and one of them might not = even be an I-D. We need a short, sharp document that very concisely lays out the = administrative requirements (in RFC2119) for using Github (and similar = things?) at the IETF.=20 That document is probably relatively long-lived. Then, we need to collect advice for people who use such things, based = upon experience. That's likely to change a fair amount of time, and = doesn't need to be an RFC. Cheers, > On 18 Feb 2017, at 9:52 am, Martin Thomson = wrote: >=20 > Alia and I were discussing the proposed "BOF" for Chicago. It was > apparent that lack of something concrete to talk about was the main > reason we were having second thoughts about having the meeting. >=20 > We decided to remove that uncertainty, which made the decision about > whether to have the meeting much easier. Thus, it appears as though > we will have a short meeting AND we now have something to argue about. > Obviously, this is very drafty right now, but better to get the > feedback cycle started early. >=20 > See: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-github-bcp >=20 > Contrary to all expectations, the draft is also on GitHub: > https://github.com/unicorn-wg/github-bcp >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Tue Feb 21 23:56:46 2017 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 4F55E129422 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 23:56:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.702 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 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=-0.001, 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 44Qps9RENiYC for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 23:56:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com [96.6.114.112]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC25126B6D for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 23:56:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id C70BE200068; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 07:56:43 +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 B1366200011; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 07:56:43 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1487750203; bh=b4qoBPzxSFIInLUnjAac3jlSeaLzmu55Ah/RJMK3bUE=; l=514; h=From:To:CC:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=QOe6+CjutbmpTTzg87v9jlWnP6bDuUyXRVvk58iuZ57XPcyYG3RCBs5OebPAx/xvk AMrAfpnM2tC+i7wIX8i7XDe/j7Gc4cDXnWuqyobZ4zLZJHEVaGp5bMLUEqh57ZkgWy xe+7UxcrWPFN+DvQqW2HEnrc/OISNBJDjJlr6lv4= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cas1.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 982371E07C; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 07:56:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 23:56:43 -0800 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, 22 Feb 2017 02:56:42 -0500 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage Thread-Index: AQHSiXCFHf1qe6yyYESLk8sls5SD46F0EYqwgADDqwD//9nUUA== Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 07:56:41 +0000 Message-ID: <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.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: [172.19.40.144] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 07:56:45 -0000 PiBJIGRvbid0IGtub3cgaG93IHlvdSBzZWUgQUNNRSBiZW5lZml0aW5nIGZyb20gaXRzIHVzZSBv ZiBHaXRIdWIsIGJ1dCBJIGhhdmUNCj4gc2VlbiB0aGUgYmVuZWZpdHMgZnJvbSByZWFjaGluZyBl eGlzdGluZyBHaXRIdWIgdXNlcnMuICBUaG91Z2ggR2l0TGFiIGlzDQo+IHF1aXRlIGdvb2QsIGlu c3RhbGxpbmcgb3VyIG93biBjb3B5IG9mIGFueXRoaW5nIHdvdWxkbid0IGVuZCB1cCB3aXRoIHVz DQo+IGdhaW5pbmcgYWNjZXNzIHRvIEdpdEh1YiB1c2Vycy4NCg0KRWl0aGVyIHlvdSdyZSBjb25m dXNlZCBvciBJIGRvbid0IHVuZGVyc3RhbmQgeW91ciByZXNwb25zZS4gIEdpdGxhYiBvZmZlcnMg ZnJlZSBob3N0aW5nIGp1c3QgbGlrZSBnaXRodWIuDQo= From nobody Wed Feb 22 00:17:26 2017 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 346A2129444 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:17:25 -0800 (PST) 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 yt0jcbrSPtGz for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:17:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qt0-x231.google.com (mail-qt0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::231]) (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 E12321293DF for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:17:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt0-x231.google.com with SMTP id x35so2907305qtc.2 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:17:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=w00q4HiFyQbA894mFclZ4lD2VZH6LWQKDayxSOjppvw=; b=VvHXC5RP3C6l8GLbhtFVWoFTQ1XdOPlZYChQhB4Jf7P/6x+aloymYvGzjM59p0dM1D +bEqCC4oyUCoL5L3xMgeWM2BgP3lFVW/FU3GKq31/Th4vXw87EONMl+RuEUDSgmpRFSj pjWiFVfZBl+j4rgMAZ+T9HADLNy7oIufwPbX3Vb5B1TZF8FTd7+IJWQu+7PLpzDVO+9L kEeTxYTQdokCysd9ihKghe4q2zgwHc5cUVn+uYUAT6UTgBCtnNfytmOHTLj5Qp7vn3mq 1hReRzoT5xQXYJQ0/X/UGiH4hTT55Q+fuk199BhIxpOPSFcTR52tgJGeePjjnxmoTAE6 1/CQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=w00q4HiFyQbA894mFclZ4lD2VZH6LWQKDayxSOjppvw=; b=c/zkeJNuvY0MhYA5eiYZ5QzB+/9x5bkT/X2kjgF+X5VY1o57alQgcPskQKe0bgS6CO X+VGqRwjVU5ADfW/BBELzj2aD072HIl2v+Yv+zLtFcZ7OeF4u4qxfif3n68g3GkrcAOD Y0Ycucbr8K6i0NUXCVYY5WpWRaADGYHw6+/Tl3YLbyKheJBXp7MAZ3JgH+PgHNUOROyo aITkvTW9ZSrAtiIoqRBQUDfDB4X6O5d/mP8hdSL2+3/Nkgc95DHBFAsTyp0F+m4rZu+p 9s5ObO3Kv/fKc4xrNmRtyywUBw6FVBYFMSYU1e4ugibdbh9gEvErTN9aM7q02GAkExJd gkEA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kgg6BVUcjn8innojDmKX2nlLztiZmvEYQupHLPzYITkVCotjUMzJLGphWY0hTTqlhiSM8s/D8xBC5TPQ== X-Received: by 10.200.39.200 with SMTP id x8mr28447377qtx.159.1487751443033; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:17:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.19.112 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:17:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> From: Martin Thomson Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:17:22 +1100 Message-ID: To: "Salz, Rich" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 08:17:25 -0000 On 22 February 2017 at 18:56, Salz, Rich wrote: > Either you're confused or I don't understand your response. Gitlab offers free hosting just like github. Ahh, that's probably because I am confused, or I haven't been clear enough. There are two things that I had considered: using github and using an private install of gitlab. I see no real value in using a hosted service if it isn't github. From nobody Wed Feb 22 00:18:11 2017 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 D460F1293DF for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:18:06 -0800 (PST) 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 jTEk9Fx3vRyB for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:18:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qt0-x230.google.com (mail-qt0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::230]) (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 B2C00129457 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:18:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt0-x230.google.com with SMTP id x35so2917334qtc.2 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:18:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xQf1F6kApAgwDuVx+s1dAiZPj9nwKTMXP0wKXh5aANI=; b=keNj8+F9mAhdN4nia0PGwgv2/qQxisLIgLFpT4XPR+QnwgdW6iCtyurG9EL3XOtTci btRX2RHXbvooSnWL6wXjJkvjIJTeiWzLyO/I7yapPRvn+qq9/yZnOCX+rHIWnH2JYOTr ENc4e8g+xfLMHcu8+8VeuxT+fElPsWSzZBg8t8Xhe417iNEJElJbcFrPl7YWytXTJsVj ID9FJJRYX4HMBFe1ejlmDqOLoZM9evxrMOgd4otQwYE2cL85GPoI5ZuiUbmaXxlm5x9W VmXEXW3hkHl9v5Y/+O9G8K/VaOUoCdMUa8LowgfL2+qZZXg402+nCZrLWzQJWztG3EsR aXwg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xQf1F6kApAgwDuVx+s1dAiZPj9nwKTMXP0wKXh5aANI=; b=STVH+pk6mG/pMQldpfrWn9fp4UPGh6AskbtJAZ/oQy24hbw7cGUG40E8ue0CgPChy1 RRZ/cw1GZa2P557INsTimSF9aVuJlOyEZ8OXLIApKIQha4UmuVH9B4MslV9kxVfIA9jf cZnH0167tCzQfiSLK4Zjv/cGgU1IfC/1sP1vcUgrQXPR5iJXGckPdna5yteCAokghQlY eYoKrmePsrKkDZboMJG1spYSBs54gaKvM6MjHwWsa/G5Daxn8ITZ4Sw6L+Acly0pL3T3 qeLpo08ZXtk/K/68XgP5itwlcFNLqCCOcxCkN6zx5o8J6V7K7J/RSnq8xD2M+cfWgbYb 8/nw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nboADyP4S/x9DV18QsgipsRpGE02qZReXMwCEMIMaFzz3IiE7E3s5jpT7rKr7WZa5B7+3lWzasOruHxg== X-Received: by 10.200.46.208 with SMTP id i16mr335643qta.13.1487751484877; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:18:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.19.112 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:18:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Martin Thomson Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:18:04 +1100 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 08:18:07 -0000 On 22 February 2017 at 17:15, Mark Nottingham wrote: > We need a short, sharp document that very concisely lays out the administrative requirements (in RFC2119) for using Github (and similar things?) at the IETF. This is where I was headed, though the expository text is perhaps a little broader than that narrower remit would dictate. From nobody Wed Feb 22 00:23:03 2017 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 5F13A1293DF for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:23:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.702 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 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=-0.001, 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 tMd4UtxrbEsc for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:23:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com [96.6.114.112]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F85F129444 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:23:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EC6A200068; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:23:00 +0000 (GMT) Received: from prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com [172.27.22.71]) by prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 171A4200011; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:23:00 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1487751780; bh=TyR19g0P0f5Mbzq8MpvZw2Fh2Da7sF+ZCG/TbSAJzPc=; l=552; h=From:To:CC:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=cGMg62D1eYEqSAnGkfjlir8lrm5Qxpw+Q4zMMcMBAShb5pYz2TsAVe472+B9ViR/e GgMudyvnRm3Y5tmVFs8AdcqY9fGVCwV79+UPSYBdHj3CcljaWBsWWB3b+HR7u/54w5 ksfIY8sCToOuQ6/U3vxH5uboXn3zO81TNmCbVc9U= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (ecp.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.33]) by prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F249098087; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:22:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 03:22:59 -0500 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, 22 Feb 2017 03:22:59 -0500 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage Thread-Index: AQHSiXCFHf1qe6yyYESLk8sls5SD46F0EYqwgADDqwD//9nUUIAAWhYA//+tIXA= Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:22:58 +0000 Message-ID: References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.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: [172.19.40.144] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 08:23:01 -0000 PiAgSSBzZWUgbm8gcmVhbCB2YWx1ZSBpbiB1c2luZyBhIGhvc3RlZCBzZXJ2aWNlIGlmIGl0IGlz bid0IGdpdGh1Yi4NCg0KVGhlbiBwbGVhc2UgY29uc2lkZXIgdGhpcyBhIHJlcXVlc3QgdG8gYWRk IHNvbWUgcmF0aW9uYWxlIGZvciB0aGF0Lg0KDQpJZiB3ZSBhcmUgZ29pbmcgdG8gcHV0IGFsbCBv ZiB0aGVzZSBlZ2dzIGluIHRoZSBHSCBiYXNrZXQsIHdoaWNoIGlzIG9rYXkgd2l0aCBtZSwgdGhl biBwZXJoYXBzIHRoZSBJRVRGIHNob3VsZCByZWFjaCBvdXQgdG8gR0ggYW5kIHNlZSBhYm91dCBt YWtpbmcgdGhpbmdzIG1vcmUgb2ZmaWNpYWwgYW5kIHNlYW1sZXNzLiAgRm9yIGV4YW1wbGUsIGFu IElFVEYgb3JnYW5pemF0aW9uIGFuZCBuYW1pbmcgZ3JvdXBzIGxpa2UgaWV0Zi13Zy14eHh4eC4N Cg0K From nobody Wed Feb 22 12:53:25 2017 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 C553B129AFA for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:53:23 -0800 (PST) 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 QMxaXppKOcfd for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:53:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::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 6E9EB129B32 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:53:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id b80so7503513lfe.3 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:53:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Lf3BuFaF+nYSmVgTqnccx1aS2OVftmAcuQXx3ogEGUI=; b=Dq2jNLpy3/u3B/t0MlUr4iUCwv90qQn7khc4bhAWdWu4XWci+sAwUguxUjgp036M1A mr5jYpL1gN2PS13HPf9MoGXSNNAqLCio8EMCkYVSq+XakLtYhcvU6iy4PJcnQjL/Qxz/ /G+1hNFpsvVI4lSHB4yRmu7CvkYBET19cR+tk8pEqDghAstcqgsspG5Rui4w5Nz5zJ0N jSMcik3EAygHn76hJq+a3O/CuSuCBTIUG7rbLJ4sw6JRo+sMAn5Jw3ksFUD+4uE2ppPm cz4Qhkir9wpPWi2hXpGleL/CByOerjRigf7V6Od56/k40TY3wINj9LO/0tSX1Dalg7RM Bu7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Lf3BuFaF+nYSmVgTqnccx1aS2OVftmAcuQXx3ogEGUI=; b=UAj1/BBMonnn99owItSjv7Oeoj1br6SWBI+i78GUydj07+kpF2758fx6Ie2isuN2Mo 4HPM8x3zHV/nEGjP7rVGfZUey2AyY3bOkAx8MHtczT+R2pvO9cro5yq9xwgda6k+gJVa MC4vi46zZnW1Q2MtaJitmQFMQwQfBQK1ILRj/Uq0BcjrSNimXEf5Aq2siccvFKZuYCJk gOyTagYIBvs+2ksirqBvxv3YnUmM6w0OV0jlRVOatv2h/UbHZbVQ3ycEWHEpy/MvJG/y YrUZylMPITy1kYAW3SN0amPCTGAoZszFq6YpXwtj72c/KX/xfsNEIoiMX8V9R3gT+mKN sf0g== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39krk4n6llBaEWm/cwX05U57F2EfuHhXym2XYWPZ0uzsyraiQup0mOq0JO4n3Wb39hpQlWsr7pYT1BsIQQ== X-Received: by 10.25.68.1 with SMTP id r1mr9647224lfa.86.1487796786629; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:53:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.75.25 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:53:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> From: Martin Thomson Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 07:53:06 +1100 Message-ID: To: "Salz, Rich" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 20:53:24 -0000 On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich wrote: > perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making things more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. The IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that names are vulnerable. We're not that special, and I don't think we need special treatment. From nobody Wed Feb 22 12:58:34 2017 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 45359129997 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:58:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.702 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 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=-0.001, 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 HDjDGLPB-CMR for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:58:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay05.akamai.com [23.79.238.179]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 082431298BF for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:58:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6283D43343F; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 20:58:31 +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 4C98443343C; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 20:58:31 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1487797111; bh=Erk3n4uYttJUMNn5n46oL4ZrjBxPu68ERyirb2hYWjA=; l=638; h=From:To:CC:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=qzlGf4EHVIXUHC3pxK4ufoLHGyGwLmn45grQl7Zz/T7QkASaseNaxav9W6hMKKmY4 pSh9nXLNABSgkqcF49NTmmk4PvVUorNC17eqC5Z8fGNV+cjqjDgzlDtvqCD3tmt+gy pvC9uv1w2lE+BlaGTzGbEZsIRjlTRzTrdnQdOkfw= Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cas3.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.32]) by prod-mail-relay10.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4872B1FC8C; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 20:58:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-EXJRNL1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.99) by usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:58:31 -0800 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, 22 Feb 2017 15:58:30 -0500 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, 22 Feb 2017 15:58:30 -0500 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage Thread-Index: AQHSiXCFHf1qe6yyYESLk8sls5SD46F0EYqwgADDqwD//9nUUIAAWhYA//+tIXCAASYFAP//rXnQ Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 20:58:30 +0000 Message-ID: <8cd5f43cd70e4d5cb04f1ef854d812ce@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.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: [172.19.34.120] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 20:58:33 -0000 PiBGV0lXLCBJJ20gZGlzY3Vzc2luZyB3aXRoIHRoZSBJRVNHIGFib3V0IGhvdyB0aGF0IG1pZ2h0 IHByb2NlZWQuICBUaGUgSUVURg0KPiBhbHJlYWR5IGhhcyBhIGdpdGh1YiBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24u ICBJIGRvbid0IHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgd2UgY2FuIGNhbXAgb24gYSBzbGljZSBvZg0KPiB0aGUgbmFt ZXNwYWNlLCBidXQgd2lsbCBoYXZlIHRvIGFjY2VwdCB0aGF0IG5hbWVzIGFyZSB2dWxuZXJhYmxl Lg0KPiANCj4gV2UncmUgbm90IHRoYXQgc3BlY2lhbCwgYW5kIEkgZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgd2UgbmVl ZCBzcGVjaWFsIHRyZWF0bWVudC4NCg0KRG9uJ3Qga25vdyB3aGF0J3MgdGhlcmUgdW50aWwgeW91 IGFzayBhYm91dCBpdC4gOikNCg0KSSB0aGluayB0aGUgbmFtaW5nIHNjaGVtZSBpbiB5b3VyIGRy YWZ0IGlzIGJhY2t3YXJkczsgaWV0Zi13Zy14eHh4IG1ha2VzIHRoaW5ncyBtdWNoIGVhc2llciB0 byBmaW5kLg0K From nobody Wed Feb 22 15:50:17 2017 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 20EAA120726 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:50:16 -0800 (PST) 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 h1lHikhGrOg5 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:50:13 -0800 (PST) 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 51DD41204D9 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:50:13 -0800 (PST) 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 1561722E256; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:50:05 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:50:02 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> To: Martin Thomson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: "Salz, Rich" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 23:50:16 -0000 +1 > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson = wrote: >=20 > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich wrote: >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making things = more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization and = naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. >=20 >=20 > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. The > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that names > are vulnerable. >=20 > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special treatment. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Feb 22 15:54:00 2017 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 3BA08128B44 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:53:55 -0800 (PST) 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 r-4CAwjBTH_W for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:53:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw0-x232.google.com (mail-yw0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::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 242B31289B0 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:53:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yw0-x232.google.com with SMTP id l19so9454874ywc.2 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:53:52 -0800 (PST) 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=9aPvlf7rB58/SDeqd1ZTOZiAf5YIA9V2xUINI4O600Y=; b=jmCU3nTUyB866RIQl1gkuh+dpDVRNn6DAlV7jF54GbPQmpzuWHedyCSFYKGeAo7PEk k3A8ZQv4IhuyWIiFdcH426lxcOxXwyqBmGOcnInmOh/C08aocHEtZlwNNihYJPwU0kZF 6FBZZHU/iJfHNxi/I7CKKRB0806P7IgnXBHGJm9nbr52OYhLBluhGiWR87ELUSbL89L0 JhVFEmIWp5vPmo9rUuMffwci9BTfM/O0fl5b24Mm1yb7UqaLH/r+O8Xxq+udkzJmAlvD D/3fg9XHQ3nXq0BsUAuMerhYuJ759o2dyORqSZabKgyI1PlwrVIiG2NfBgYvanztHGIT sC9A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9aPvlf7rB58/SDeqd1ZTOZiAf5YIA9V2xUINI4O600Y=; b=QHIxUZwTlrl0FZPIS2zNIGO4ljMrNaoNONiFAHaTlq+NDs0TwG4dNVRh9YgALLJx67 CclZeT9X6mMLL33R0VZ1oeLbDJ7cV+JOK407nuDqWXDj8TWSDtJNaVbM5NjFklXROtZ3 ZNPiAPAZA+Rg5jW7QCouHXQx60sdzc8yK3L4WCTM3KJiFrS7aRx/stkepSrNuvGLbpLg dxkYdjGvdTFTjhRVNhJJ3CQj0PSZeyCLzfncxERVVq7LncG/ebmP76Fp0qA2in+lFhGB nPRVBH+NdB1hoM9BVEktirHx+vxnD3xLjjudJRN62EsbIDUW+Baft0+roKqm/68qkEkn RFzQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39n3z0UugTjwQpJ6kMolz14AX1bpTMu65XTrNF/DmIIkr5jD1uuXRGM2Kf72e444y4Zqp1srRshM4h8SKA== X-Received: by 10.129.108.131 with SMTP id h125mr26452742ywc.71.1487807631381; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:53:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.153.200 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:53:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:53:10 -0800 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114dcf785ceec90549273514 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "Salz, Rich" , Martin Thomson Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 23:53:55 -0000 --001a114dcf785ceec90549273514 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be awesome for tsvwg. Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. -Ekr On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > +1 > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson > wrote: > > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich wrote: > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making things > more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization and naming > groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. > > > > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. The > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that names > > are vulnerable. > > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special treatment. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > -- > 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 > --001a114dcf785ceec90549273514 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Maybe ietf-wg-<wgname>wg. Which I think we can agree= will be awesome for tsvwg.

Seriously, ietf-wg-<wgnam= e> seems fine.

-Ekr


On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham = <mnot@mnot.net>= ; wrote:
+1


> On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:
>> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making thing= s more official and seamless.=C2=A0 For example, an IETF organization and n= aming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx.
>
>
> FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed.= =C2=A0 The
> IETF already has a github organization.=C2=A0 I don't think that w= e can
> camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that names > are vulnerable.
>
> We're not that special, and I don't think we need special trea= tment.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-and-github mailing list
> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinf= o/ietf-and-github

--
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

--001a114dcf785ceec90549273514-- From nobody Wed Feb 22 15:57:52 2017 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 75F2B1293DA for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:57:51 -0800 (PST) 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 dWLRtPjnDclE for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:57:49 -0800 (PST) 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 4994A128AC9 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:57:49 -0800 (PST) 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 4BB3422E253; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:57:46 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:57:44 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> To: Eric Rescorla X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "Salz, Rich" , Martin Thomson Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 22 Feb 2017 23:57:51 -0000 Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is = "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their = exclusive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea. I personally don't think it's worth the effort. > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: >=20 > Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be awesome = for tsvwg. >=20 > Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. >=20 > -Ekr >=20 >=20 > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham = wrote: > +1 >=20 >=20 > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson = wrote: > > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich wrote: > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making things = more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization and = naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. > > > > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. = The > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that names > > are vulnerable. > > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special treatment. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >=20 > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >=20 -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Feb 22 16:01:09 2017 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 D11851293D6 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:01:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=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 eF1PobWX7jRT for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm0-x22d.google.com (mail-wm0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c: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 7AB7C126DFB for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id v77so13712911wmv.1 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:01:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xzi3UiCoQ31rwLhJ9qzc2ZraS7EXScH77dnKRGds/z0=; b=Kd53tN3SFF2H0m1AbppSiK1+0TIKclcMK+IzaNLithP7DKxoddJiWhzFqOsYJWVM+/ vyu+SOX13M+GomQKxAS0jOP9VAgFjU955oFLe0yk96bV9KWV90c1NBy4WPCHi7TqNK0u BV/N5gQbkXNo31WTavfP5Tzq4O4UBPk27FAR+dr0AUf83ty31BW+TyZjUg/e2DclVx0y IV7YEsTH74SFVNErYvqZc+O19id+eEF3xSZhXmYVuRWc0d7/68lSiuLx7LNPw/C/UTuR hr4x6YqunkDKPK6u55o/436AfjM2F22PsBTrWD22qGuNTD6UHdFJvq0h2ngFc7r9ApcZ Y94w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xzi3UiCoQ31rwLhJ9qzc2ZraS7EXScH77dnKRGds/z0=; b=a69i8XGrpY7WOUHTMAQwvjTvaxIUaASdZHjbF74Uw0FobSwM9polvBZgBcqVbaCVjA 1jEBRed+yksEn8emJ1HvetiuPGT7uUs9ltAEmZd4idPlokfi00LsUPMQ4YHY4klASfET 9ZEVi1iW/XVjhu5DA4/LOTZHa1vxhTCq/7Uk1+dBxa1AlX1HJvOMpD89YP7hMcp+LG03 gEl/Pc6zbXGTp/6kuUHnuLgk8lPjXSOlmP2vlBXQWhVFiQIj4QEQS0JpiCXoSnkK6wer dNRhYdzAizZkEXV5E60CgfnaowJKGgcKCoZQxE2b7hkI81V/PfY+OGtF4AWlHdml0kJX FfUA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kJGkn/hNjAva1oOwPMz/0SyMJUxWHOvH6ulfJmX7H6oIMWwr/YrJmAgrTpn+BP3KBT+qSK3GyBzo+lzg== X-Received: by 10.28.207.7 with SMTP id f7mr909966wmg.112.1487808062476; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:01:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.150.93 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:01:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.150.93 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:01:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> From: Alia Atlas Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:01:01 -0500 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0d79cc0ed9e60549274f07 Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "Salz, Rich" , Eric Rescorla , Martin Thomson Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:01:08 -0000 --94eb2c0d79cc0ed9e60549274f07 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me. Regards, Alia On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" wrote: > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is > "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their exclusive > use, that doesn't seem like a good idea. > > I personally don't think it's worth the effort. > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be awesome for > tsvwg. > > > > Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. > > > > -Ekr > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > +1 > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson > wrote: > > > > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich wrote: > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making things > more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization and naming > groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. > > > > > > > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. The > > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that names > > > are vulnerable. > > > > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special treatment. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > -- > > 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 > > > > -- > 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 > --94eb2c0d79cc0ed9e60549274f07 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me.

Regards,
Alia<= /div>

On Feb= 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
Having a convention would imply that any name conforming = to it is "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github t= o their exclusive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea.

I personally don't think it's worth the effort.


> On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
> Maybe ietf-wg-<wgname>wg. Which I think we can agree will be awe= some for tsvwg.
>
> Seriously, ietf-wg-<wgname> seems fine.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> +1
>
>
> > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:
> >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making = things more official and seamless.=C2=A0 For example, an IETF organization = and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx.
> >
> >
> > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proce= ed.=C2=A0 The
> > IETF already has a github organization.=C2=A0 I don't think t= hat we can
> > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that na= mes
> > are vulnerable.
> >
> > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special= treatment.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-and-github mailing list
> > Ietf-and-github@ietf.= org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/lis= tinfo/ietf-and-github
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-and-github mailing list
> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinf= o/ietf-and-github
>

--
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
--94eb2c0d79cc0ed9e60549274f07-- From nobody Wed Feb 22 16:03:34 2017 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 9C16C129409 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:03:33 -0800 (PST) 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 DCnztuA91XhF for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:03:31 -0800 (PST) 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 8A3B01293F3 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:03:31 -0800 (PST) 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 3850C22E256; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:03:28 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 11:03:26 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> To: Alia Atlas X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "Salz, Rich" , Eric Rescorla , Martin Thomson Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:03:33 -0000 That's why we have .=20 Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github.=20 Yet. > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas wrote: >=20 > Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me. >=20 > Regards, > Alia >=20 > On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" wrote: > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is = "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their = exclusive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea. >=20 > I personally don't think it's worth the effort. >=20 >=20 > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be awesome = for tsvwg. > > > > Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. > > > > -Ekr > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham = wrote: > > +1 > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson = wrote: > > > > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich wrote: > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making = things more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization = and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. > > > > > > > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. = The > > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that = names > > > are vulnerable. > > > > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special = treatment. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > -- > > 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 > > >=20 > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Feb 22 16:11:15 2017 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 8589B129C8C for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:11:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=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 HnDQZw1N_yeo for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:11:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c: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 41C11127076 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:11:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id v186so156137005wmd.0 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:11:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LNnLHx/o5ooBwGkd6HB2z2nwX674wdC7mREcPQJ1i6Y=; b=dPlcaAyqJsYTVDmKKi8jLH71gA79M7uq2o4pU5NjoGypNZATA5oAzuM5Mz7L4JQ1im 1MM29Co+XFTLkYB9kcw9Q8ZWkE2JoTafoK5gjAAtqNiIrhaFY6FRzCTWaVKdiQZm/MDj LLre2h6Hlp4ccSMKIuN6Biify7BCWUQlF+gHQYhCeK9qvTm6k7bUJBY6LP+0Yk1OnFcQ TNL4fi1upIbJ0bW7cdBtxTxjIQLiwXqTtto18juOv1wsFVMsHG3AM5tWVTR7IAjz1k/N rjVGHidgWn1Q9pGapMzfw9Neftl/KPvDMRtIyH/B6s7AdXBmWvyWh7n2Ma60a8NUgLER Mj1A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LNnLHx/o5ooBwGkd6HB2z2nwX674wdC7mREcPQJ1i6Y=; b=I3it1plJ2ZhFSJ6TTmRkx/oN+knBkaLvHK2p+YxFh75P1rXokuecyB9ZxYrP9C4j+o jLzAewUjAfMxDkHgldA5keBQ50nawVbgkKBVODSCrPNbA6O5AZ4NahL6ZQvrDEl87OuB D8UlVUABewd8+gucbZ9FfRdwrH0A+Ue5s6hM4jQibskVD2n/PeqRP2OXa83gaTQ7vST4 PFldo5B5vecTpXa1RJgtx79i4OMC4T0mq6KsoziKBk6qDCPaky8KDP6F3yuGZvQCWkHm nRiKJ3M38Bx6kJ7IJmcpz+OqtusgkiMHR8Ze2nHcDJHGqlJE5ynW/4AnxSXZuz4DAFtj /5PA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lslulXwort+HoX0D+X7nIfYjlxzPzY/QodMncDBB2UJVewrxAiRV2mHgdWH/Tp+vwDhkt+px9CnFzFRg== X-Received: by 10.28.207.7 with SMTP id f7mr945002wmg.112.1487808669477; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:11:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.150.93 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:11:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> From: Alia Atlas Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:11:09 -0500 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0d79cc3cf2ab05492773de Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "Salz, Rich" , Eric Rescorla , Martin Thomson Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:11:13 -0000 --94eb2c0d79cc3cf2ab05492773de Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > That's why we have . > Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual participant (who doesn't know of or use the datatracker) seems useful to me - particularly since the cost to do it doesn't feel high to me. What are you seeing as the downside? I am, of course, only talking about finding the repository associated with a WG if the WG is using Github. Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github. > > Yet. That's a much more nuanced discussion and highly depends on what the perceived benefits are for a particular WG. Regards, Alia > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas wrote: > > > > Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me. > > > > Regards, > > Alia > > > > On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" wrote: > > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is > "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their exclusive > use, that doesn't seem like a good idea. > > > > I personally don't think it's worth the effort. > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > > > Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be awesome > for tsvwg. > > > > > > Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. > > > > > > -Ekr > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson > wrote: > > > > > > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making things > more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization and naming > groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. > > > > > > > > > > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. The > > > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can > > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that names > > > > are vulnerable. > > > > > > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special treatment. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > > > -- > > > 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 > > > > > > > -- > > 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 > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > --94eb2c0d79cc3cf2ab05492773de Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On W= ed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wr= ote:
That's why we have <= https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/>.

Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual particip= ant (who doesn't
know of or use the datatracker) seems useful= to me - particularly since the cost to
do it doesn't feel hi= gh to me. =C2=A0 What are you seeing as the downside?

<= div>I am, of course, only talking about finding the repository associated w= ith a WG if the
WG is using Github.

Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github.

Yet.

That's a much more nuanced discuss= ion and highly depends on what the perceived
benefits are for a p= articular WG.

Regards,
Alia=C2=A0
<= div>=C2=A0

> On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me.
>
> Regards,
> Alia
>
> On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is &quo= t;official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their exclu= sive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea.
>
> I personally don't think it's worth the effort.
>
>
> > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe ietf-wg-<wgname>wg. Which I think we can agree will b= e awesome for tsvwg.
> >
> > Seriously, ietf-wg-<wgname> seems fine.
> >
> > -Ekr
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> >
> > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:
> > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about ma= king things more official and seamless.=C2=A0 For example, an IETF organiza= tion and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx.
> > >
> > >
> > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might = proceed.=C2=A0 The
> > > IETF already has a github organization.=C2=A0 I don't th= ink that we can
> > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept th= at names
> > > are vulnerable.
> > >
> > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need sp= ecial treatment.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Ietf-and-github mailing list
> > > Ietf-and-github@= ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
> >
> > --
> > Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-and-github mailing list
> > Ietf-and-github@ietf.= org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/lis= tinfo/ietf-and-github
> >
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-and-github mailing list
> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinf= o/ietf-and-github

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


--94eb2c0d79cc3cf2ab05492773de-- From nobody Wed Feb 22 16:25:39 2017 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 2866A12943E for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:25:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 FEnWXbmd2n9v for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:25:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-x233.google.com (mail-lf0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::233]) (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 AD49B129412 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:25:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-x233.google.com with SMTP id l12so9428788lfe.0 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:25:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jx947zThPQBpQ99C4LYebqLthIyeRGjfB0eP5Dl5ElA=; b=C37aYTDeTxG2nWdirhBg1rk80K2j6gFAFdpONQXNOLeXMveDgjxv/rTg9z653GkwKV 1n9fiIkCenEQYLCzfvhvYVm5Hndmi8T2lBpmLHksZ87GLhTQsYIyWdDhssOnObCLz199 h5YOrkqD6DtM/WEYXZdPzzrwMg2s6xBCqFd0w6lTw1od0DiLzHGvGMSjDzGplBGWJaqN golLun6p4zskIKsVUYjjcpeZahEiilQ5ORdSGxtVp+zNWH/uINKOmZGxKdCJz9Q29+EO TX26P/eTcvHm1Rrbb4WdDE26s9L+e+RlQWB6F3ChlWzdiu0DJnGpngI1Z15EMQicEt5i heXw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jx947zThPQBpQ99C4LYebqLthIyeRGjfB0eP5Dl5ElA=; b=endjdPnitjaYNvLT++choW5Xllce+NlpaNc3Re2PZt5b2u+a7WFFrC25TsCUdn9w/e Oe27zQMnrOSs34VMufMthiyk16faBivizgBsPXzPdBAie/viTS79dk6kxYcHvgGoLDmX ehYJREIDZCUcJpMU4JvHlDRK3x2xnjnu1dy+qPtf2mEmPRIib+OfjV+xzshkoLUSKbit QDPStVMG/Tlq48JPYHmEZnbgP8fvefebRWH1U+9Ixs2gS8lb5zXegsMesBct7bwInRfK he3vXsUpGFkzNg8TZVH7OjfVV5NQZdrqCbYkAOr+t3pxpT3qFp1dWkZrHkss0E2W4K8D vGsg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mpD0UiVmmb9Nk3CXfw/ck9PHIm5uoEAyuoRmM8HfREUI19JUpdyqZoIH+zTb0xQM5yAibAuKI+1KsQPQ== X-Received: by 10.25.196.21 with SMTP id u21mr1554350lff.81.1487809533964; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:25:33 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.75.25 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:25:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> From: Martin Thomson Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 11:25:33 +1100 Message-ID: To: Alia Atlas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "Salz, Rich" , Mark Nottingham , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Eric Rescorla Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:25:37 -0000 On 23 February 2017 at 11:11, Alia Atlas wrote: >> That's why we have . > > > Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual participant (who > doesn't > know of or use the datatracker) seems useful to me A convention is fine. But you don't need to BCP something to get a convention. I think that is where the disconnect lies. If you look at the working groups that are using GitHub already, the naming is pretty random. And frankly, I think that is fine. We have a working directory of working groups in the datatracker. That also addresses the issue of having someone decide to go to bitbucket or gitlab. All the datatracker needs to do is link to the working group hub/organization/repo/whatever. In addition to this, it would be nice to collect a specific repository link in draft metadata. From nobody Wed Feb 22 16:26:50 2017 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 24ACB129D28 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:26:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 O2xEMctZL8z4 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:26:25 -0800 (PST) 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 65AFF129D17 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:26:20 -0800 (PST) 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 E1B0522E253; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:26:12 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 11:26:09 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5BC1169E-42F1-4C6E-8F66-1AA3136D071A@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> To: Alia Atlas X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "Salz, Rich" , Eric Rescorla , Martin Thomson Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:26:34 -0000 > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:11 am, Alia Atlas wrote: >=20 > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Mark Nottingham = wrote: > That's why we have . >=20 > Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual participant = (who doesn't > know of or use the datatracker) seems useful to me - particularly = since the cost to > do it doesn't feel high to me. What are you seeing as the downside? We don't control that name space, and if we imply that any github org = starting with ietf-* is an IETF WG, that can be abused, unless we have = an agreement with the manager of the name space (github).=20 If we can get that agreement easily, great, but I suspect it may not be = easy (since AFAICT it will set a precedent for them, and they'll need to = develop internal policies for it). If we don't get such an agreement, it will be extremely easy to squat on = a WG's name, either unintentionally or intentionally. For example, the = QUIC proponents reserved "IETF-QUIC"; we decided not to reuse it because = we needed a clean break. Also, we have a number of WGs that already use Github that don't conform = to any convention, so we'll either have inconsistencies, or need to move = orgs and wear the potential mess that will create. To be clear -- I'm not necessarily against having a suggested naming = scheme, but the value seems pretty low if we don't have a way of = guaranteeing that a given WG name maps to a given github org. Making it = a requirement without such a guarantee would be unworkable, and even if = we did have the guarantee, we'd still have a legacy problem.=20 Cheers, P.S. There are already about 20 users/orgs starting with "ietf-" on = Github, and many of them are not IETF WGs; quite a few are not official = IETF efforts at all. >=20 > I am, of course, only talking about finding the repository associated = with a WG if the > WG is using Github. >=20 > Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github. >=20 > Yet. >=20 > That's a much more nuanced discussion and highly depends on what the = perceived > benefits are for a particular WG. >=20 > Regards, > Alia=20 > =20 >=20 > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas wrote: > > > > Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me. > > > > Regards, > > Alia > > > > On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" wrote: > > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is = "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their = exclusive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea. > > > > I personally don't think it's worth the effort. > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > > > Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be = awesome for tsvwg. > > > > > > Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. > > > > > > -Ekr > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham = wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson = wrote: > > > > > > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich = wrote: > > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making = things more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization = and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. > > > > > > > > > > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. = The > > > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we = can > > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that = names > > > > are vulnerable. > > > > > > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special = treatment. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > > > -- > > > 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 > > > > > > > -- > > 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 >=20 > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >=20 >=20 -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Feb 22 16:32:15 2017 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 0F587129D39 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:32:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.698 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 PNdqQyAdpzCf for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:32:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm0-x229.google.com (mail-wm0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::229]) (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 B5FBB126BF6 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:32:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x229.google.com with SMTP id v77so13603782wmv.0 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:32:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JDTzb/AJVK7i3aR5X8ddf/NbsWEjTLSvVmnQoWOyn0s=; b=IYmoikvmpsTAn2wovHigKaWs1YkIEbbC23BAQeK1Zt8Kw5RzOQiWTr0nJbPG/6NG/x 79tq8CTb46K6ioFDP6Z0WKoMrIJQngZJue1yykHNrsYs1d18vPhIJRxH+dlNbRLL8BRY t0lvPUhRk1PzrgbIv2QGVznSU5TVddC7g4O97ynPE4bYxIj5qMHn1XOYyNr6TSoY8i1U sYaHDJ3E3aJU/UeNvMkIxrXtS7vZCnTIUUPn8er0FBRUvKJzJ843i/cJgDfGkCw715DX fmDUMAZoRSSyOb6rBMezGM8A/xeU4Q4WO0/HLaumeKxslp35GqrJJHA5UeNsejuEQDDp VdLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JDTzb/AJVK7i3aR5X8ddf/NbsWEjTLSvVmnQoWOyn0s=; b=EzO1Xrpwknw5xVQB+OVYHw8rOe+tF+rLJ8csOD4P1MQdIhPgo9jN1YCl4ehpr3wdnp RWizwTHtB/lpetA+3cldGaEM7NcayFwGQz2ybAfgpm3tOVq9EZ59Shpd6xJnYCuVtzIV fLAqayr7JDs53R+lY9mlopJVz859XyVbw3u7PR1ctGhgqea49Da/w3GTzHM+xKGzCixf 5YSV6R6gZph74aFIXFzacZ/7rH4AoV2ZmasQujinIoBXF6sL3Kh8OpefnjlXCmR/aI/p ZYwfdXDpcJ5ZEIXyCE8ghmf6KVWM72eBhN/kUfdJufGSWZ2o/loxyooc7FmMhQmJTebf sXsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kDS/pcXc+900IBlQvkq4beJfik/7pluT082b+WLwTfhmgbLQ7bQZVcMCOnYtacQjTSxxQYlLFj/sYlFg== X-Received: by 10.28.207.7 with SMTP id f7mr1013620wmg.112.1487809930013; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:32:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.150.93 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:32:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5BC1169E-42F1-4C6E-8F66-1AA3136D071A@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> <5BC1169E-42F1-4C6E-8F66-1AA3136D071A@mnot.net> From: Alia Atlas Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:32:09 -0500 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0d79cc5f3253054927beda Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "Salz, Rich" , Eric Rescorla , Martin Thomson Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:32:14 -0000 --94eb2c0d79cc5f3253054927beda Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I see the value in having a suggested naming scheme for future WGs that decide to use github. I certainly hear the concern about mandating it - and that isn't what I put in the draft. The draft does say that there SHOULD be a consistent naming scheme; the specific one (and ietf-wg- would be fine!) isn't particularly important. If there is no recommendation, then the current state will remain the same going forward - which makes it harder, IMHO, for the random community outreach benefits that going to GitHub provides. Regards, Alia On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:26 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:11 am, Alia Atlas wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > That's why we have . > > > > Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual participant > (who doesn't > > know of or use the datatracker) seems useful to me - particularly since > the cost to > > do it doesn't feel high to me. What are you seeing as the downside? > > We don't control that name space, and if we imply that any github org > starting with ietf-* is an IETF WG, that can be abused, unless we have an > agreement with the manager of the name space (github). > > If we can get that agreement easily, great, but I suspect it may not be > easy (since AFAICT it will set a precedent for them, and they'll need to > develop internal policies for it). > > If we don't get such an agreement, it will be extremely easy to squat on a > WG's name, either unintentionally or intentionally. For example, the QUIC > proponents reserved "IETF-QUIC"; we decided not to reuse it because we > needed a clean break. > > Also, we have a number of WGs that already use Github that don't conform > to any convention, so we'll either have inconsistencies, or need to move > orgs and wear the potential mess that will create. > > To be clear -- I'm not necessarily against having a suggested naming > scheme, but the value seems pretty low if we don't have a way of > guaranteeing that a given WG name maps to a given github org. Making it a > requirement without such a guarantee would be unworkable, and even if we > did have the guarantee, we'd still have a legacy problem. > > Cheers, > > P.S. There are already about 20 users/orgs starting with "ietf-" on > Github, and many of them are not IETF WGs; quite a few are not official > IETF efforts at all. > > > > > > I am, of course, only talking about finding the repository associated > with a WG if the > > WG is using Github. > > > > Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github. > > > > Yet. > > > > That's a much more nuanced discussion and highly depends on what the > perceived > > benefits are for a particular WG. > > > > Regards, > > Alia > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas wrote: > > > > > > Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Alia > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" wrote: > > > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is > "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their exclusive > use, that doesn't seem like a good idea. > > > > > > I personally don't think it's worth the effort. > > > > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > > > > > Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be awesome > for tsvwg. > > > > > > > > Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. > > > > > > > > -Ekr > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham > wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson < > martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making > things more official and seamless. For example, an IETF organization and > naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might proceed. > The > > > > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can > > > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that > names > > > > > are vulnerable. > > > > > > > > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > > > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > 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 > > > > -- > > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > > > > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > --94eb2c0d79cc5f3253054927beda Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I see the value in having a suggested naming scheme for fu= ture WGs that decide to use github.
I certainly hear the concern about = mandating it - and that isn't what I put in the draft. =C2=A0 The draft= does say that there SHOULD be a consistent naming scheme; the specific one= (and ietf-wg-<wgname> would be fine!) isn't particularly importa= nt. =C2=A0

If there is no recommendation, then the= current state will remain the same going forward - which makes it harder, = IMHO, for the random community outreach benefits that going to GitHub provi= des.

Regards,
Alia

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:2= 6 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:11 am, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> That's why we have <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg= />.
>
> Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual participant= (who doesn't
> know of or use the datatracker) seems useful to me - particularly sinc= e the cost to
> do it doesn't feel high to me.=C2=A0 =C2=A0What are you seeing as = the downside?

We don't control that name space, and if we imply that any githu= b org starting with ietf-* is an IETF WG, that can be abused, unless we hav= e an agreement with the manager of the name space (github).

If we can get that agreement easily, great, but I suspect it may not be eas= y (since AFAICT it will set a precedent for them, and they'll need to d= evelop internal policies for it).

If we don't get such an agreement, it will be extremely easy to squat o= n a WG's name, either unintentionally or intentionally. For example, th= e QUIC proponents reserved "IETF-QUIC"; we decided not to reuse i= t because we needed a clean break.

Also, we have a number of WGs that already use Github that don't confor= m to any convention, so we'll either have inconsistencies, or need to m= ove orgs and wear the potential mess that will create.

To be clear -- I'm not necessarily against having a suggested naming sc= heme, but=C2=A0 the value seems pretty low if we don't have a way of gu= aranteeing that a given WG name maps to a given github org. Making it a req= uirement without such a guarantee would be unworkable, and even if we did h= ave the guarantee, we'd still have a legacy problem.

Cheers,

P.S. There are already about 20 users/orgs starting with "ietf-" = on Github, and many of them are not IETF WGs; quite a few are not official = IETF efforts at all.


>
> I am, of course, only talking about finding the repository associated = with a WG if the
> WG is using Github.
>
> Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github.
>
> Yet.
>
> That's a much more nuanced discussion and highly depends on what t= he perceived
> benefits are for a particular WG.
>
> Regards,
> Alia
>
>
> > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alia
> >
> > On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is= "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their = exclusive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea.
> >
> > I personally don't think it's worth the effort.
> >
> >
> > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Maybe ietf-wg-<wgname>wg. Which I think we can agree w= ill be awesome for tsvwg.
> > >
> > > Seriously, ietf-wg-<wgname> seems fine.
> > >
> > > -Ekr
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> > > +1
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote= :
> > > >
> > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:
> > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see abo= ut making things more official and seamless.=C2=A0 For example, an IETF org= anization and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that m= ight proceed.=C2=A0 The
> > > > IETF already has a github organization.=C2=A0 I don'= ;t think that we can
> > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to acce= pt that names
> > > > are vulnerable.
> > > >
> > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we ne= ed special treatment.
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list
> > > > Ietf-and-gi= thub@ietf.org
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailma= n/listinfo/ietf-and-github
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-and-github mailing list
> > Ietf-and-github@ietf.= org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/lis= tinfo/ietf-and-github
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/
>
>

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


--94eb2c0d79cc5f3253054927beda-- From nobody Wed Feb 22 16:41:31 2017 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 A4A2A1293DC for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:41:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 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_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 vUMJeq-8w7oO for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:41:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxb2.tigertech.net (mxb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.164]) (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 00B8C12896F for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:41:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0215A3137; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:41:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=1.tigertech; t=1487810488; bh=rx37bXOggaKvK500ZtC1ocii30NbwDDgNuonhttbNHc=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Eyb7Bsi3jiQ+HMtcxUeFd7tvgLKAcXJruiUnQYMqYxUYV38MCIqOVuGISrKg+oazV 2rhhbS3CIann0z6FzsKk5AasIFe2SS1QVk/v5N8YRpoK42hmQt2aFrafxQL6FC9B2n Ed/sM4H37rSeleT3ewcV26qz9wGab0+AJSnX7BAU= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D90891C0D2B; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:41:27 -0800 (PST) To: Alia Atlas , Mark Nottingham References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> From: "Joel M. Halpern" Message-ID: <57874645-0d9b-d58d-e7c6-2db0036a43dd@joelhalpern.com> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:41:26 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "Salz, Rich" , Eric Rescorla , Martin Thomson , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:41:30 -0000 Using the WG name in the repository so that Google searching is useful. But expecting folks to understand what they find there without finding the IETF WG information seems to me to be unlikely to be useful. So I really am not worried about whether the repository name is easily guessed / guessable. Yours, joel On 2/22/17 7:11 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Mark Nottingham > wrote: > > That's why we have >. > > > Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual participant > (who doesn't > know of or use the datatracker) seems useful to me - particularly since > the cost to > do it doesn't feel high to me. What are you seeing as the downside? > > I am, of course, only talking about finding the repository associated > with a WG if the > WG is using Github. > > Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github. > > Yet. > > > That's a much more nuanced discussion and highly depends on what the > perceived > benefits are for a particular WG. > > Regards, > Alia > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas > wrote: > > > > Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me. > > > > Regards, > > Alia > > > > On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" > wrote: > > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is > "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their > exclusive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea. > > > > I personally don't think it's worth the effort. > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla > wrote: > > > > > > Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be > awesome for tsvwg. > > > > > > Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. > > > > > > -Ekr > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich > wrote: > > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making > things more official and seamless. For example, an IETF > organization and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. > > > > > > > > > > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might > proceed. The > > > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we can > > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that > names > > > > are vulnerable. > > > > > > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special > treatment. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > > > > -- > > > 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 > > > > > > > > -- > > 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 > > > -- > 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 Wed Feb 22 16:47:19 2017 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 E40C8129458 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:47:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 gseSNHijMxnm for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:47:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr0-x22f.google.com (mail-wr0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::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 7C1F1129455 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:47:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id z61so12752945wrc.1 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:47:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qoTpICyHKM0OrOaJfzgL8UbsqC0MbvTh/CthLFA99Jo=; b=C4iS1iwx7IbjNfS5J2zKU9OeQXzsWCUgdnJhqthjuvkVKwUfhpcH6/NIo/8CJoPDI8 Lhsi79r4CkxFoDAdyCHUyyavHBVGvkdu6Rkeyl/1m9rsgOIrOCd6XRmgGOPlAkKRQ6bw wtkVHKgCgw5EXfcCZOvWIOoR4FbRm6afqVL9BckKFHaboRLu8MqBURXGYGODbojFKIkr uyAtDeY4ujPPWUBtx1GNdAQUbp3oyy+4DISmaDkoa/XVdSfvwEsIH7dnD4pgsdTSCZnP Fy/T85X0QllsFOZ45vdueGYV4kI7m5PFIPA/vSROgzYFs0SC+Km/wQOvaKHPAlb+BUoJ O2aA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qoTpICyHKM0OrOaJfzgL8UbsqC0MbvTh/CthLFA99Jo=; b=guROwewAhm7ur5zSFJKZhogON2KZ8XXdB4oviWOu4uAPNA4YsfMwDy3dPGmMpIdCIt 7z3XUvuIaB/j8bCROGghE8A59HaFa3618Al8VvSSOPDI2L3NAokVWgxHAN3StRMHYO9T MJ4YNjRLAW7eTng8JgCfCfAVP88fv27ntGw+0szY7zOxBKqafWXKGP0DPI8eLPp3JaUb XbSD857aEd0iUOzLvSdfP9nCKnhuOrgzkaB2r+0U9vsSPBegwzSknH7QwFsjr2ka0E45 +JxodAFZino2Y1w/wspttNX8REps44Eh6FIk14wVkYywEDNg4j3KdAVbVA/Af3fsZ290 yllw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kT3+RHteTbx+v5X9etuCIwXFKewoLtKQ0bmI1Xf6F90U8ZEu5753bP/VKd7O5be0E85ZjqpS5OPChAcA== X-Received: by 10.223.146.34 with SMTP id 31mr1847530wrj.44.1487810833556; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:47:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.150.93 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:47:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <57874645-0d9b-d58d-e7c6-2db0036a43dd@joelhalpern.com> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> <57874645-0d9b-d58d-e7c6-2db0036a43dd@joelhalpern.com> From: Alia Atlas Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:47:13 -0500 Message-ID: To: "Joel M. Halpern" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0d9e883a2c9b054927f458 Archived-At: Cc: "Salz, Rich" , Mark Nottingham , Martin Thomson , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Eric Rescorla Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:47:18 -0000 --94eb2c0d9e883a2c9b054927f458 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > Using the WG name in the repository so that Google searching is useful. > But expecting folks to understand what they find there without finding the > IETF WG information seems to me to be unlikely to be useful. > I'd have to defer to those who have been getting comments and reviews from those who don't participate in the IETF generally. Martin may have a useful perspective. There'll be the Note Well equiv and probably pointers to the IETF datatracker. > So I really am not worried about whether the repository name is easily > guessed / guessable. > I certainly don't see a need to try and "harmonize" or change existing use. Having consistency going forward could be helpful - but the minimum is having the WG name & hopefully IETF so that it works well for searches. Of course, I'm happy to document whatever the community thinks is best. Regards, Alia Yours, > joel > > On 2/22/17 7:11 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Mark Nottingham > > wrote: >> >> That's why we have > >. >> >> >> Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual participant >> (who doesn't >> know of or use the datatracker) seems useful to me - particularly since >> the cost to >> do it doesn't feel high to me. What are you seeing as the downside? >> >> I am, of course, only talking about finding the repository associated >> with a WG if the >> WG is using Github. >> >> Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github. >> >> Yet. >> >> >> That's a much more nuanced discussion and highly depends on what the >> perceived >> benefits are for a particular WG. >> >> Regards, >> Alia >> >> >> >> > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas > > wrote: >> > >> > Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Alia >> > >> > On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" > > wrote: >> > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming to it is >> "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Github to their >> exclusive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea. >> > >> > I personally don't think it's worth the effort. >> > >> > >> > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Maybe ietf-wg-wg. Which I think we can agree will be >> awesome for tsvwg. >> > > >> > > Seriously, ietf-wg- seems fine. >> > > >> > > -Ekr >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham > > wrote: >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > >> > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson >> > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich > > wrote: >> > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH and see about making >> things more official and seamless. For example, an IETF >> organization and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about how that might >> proceed. The >> > > > IETF already has a github organization. I don't think that we >> can >> > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will have to accept that >> names >> > > > are vulnerable. >> > > > >> > > > We're not that special, and I don't think we need special >> treatment. >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list >> > > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >> >> > > >> > > -- >> > > 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 >> >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > 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 >> >> >> -- >> 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 >> >> --94eb2c0d9e883a2c9b054927f458 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On W= ed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com&g= t; wrote:
Using the WG name in the= repository so that Google searching is useful.
But expecting folks to understand what they find there without finding the = IETF WG information seems to me to be unlikely to be useful.

I'd have to defer to those who have been getting = comments and reviews from those who don't participate in the IETF gener= ally.=C2=A0 Martin may have a useful perspective.=C2=A0

There'll be the Note Well equiv and probably pointers to the IETF= datatracker.
=C2=A0
So I really am not worried about whether the repository name is easily gues= sed / guessable.

I certainly don't = see a need to try and "harmonize" or change existing use.=C2=A0 H= aving consistency going forward could be helpful - but the minimum is havin= g the WG name & hopefully IETF so that it works well for searches.

Of course, I'm happy to document whatever the comm= unity thinks is best. =C2=A0=C2=A0

Regards,
<= div>Alia=C2=A0

Yours,
joel

On 2/22/17 7:11 PM, Alia Atlas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net
 <mailto:mnot@mnot.net= >> wrote:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 That's why we have <https://datatracker.ietf.or= g/wg/
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/>>.=


Having a convention that makes it easier for a more casual participant
(who doesn't
know of or use the datatracker) seems useful to me - particularly since
the cost to
do it doesn't feel high to me.=C2=A0 =C2=A0What are you seeing as the d= ownside?

I am, of course, only talking about finding the repository associated
with a WG if the
WG is using Github.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Besides, not all WGs are going to be on Github.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Yet.


That's a much more nuanced discussion and highly depends on what the perceived
benefits are for a particular WG.

Regards,
Alia



=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > On 23 Feb 2017, at 11:01 am, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com
= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:akatlas@gmail.com>> wrote:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Making it easy to find them seems helpful to me.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Regards,
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Alia
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > On Feb 22, 2017 6:57 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <= ;mnot@mnot.net
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:mnot@mnot.net>> wrote:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Having a convention would imply that any name conforming= to it is
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "official." Unless we can get an agreement with Git= hub to their
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 exclusive use, that doesn't seem like a good idea.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > I personally don't think it's worth the effort.<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 10:53 am, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com
 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:= ekr@rtfm.com>> wrote:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > Maybe ietf-wg-<wgname>wg. Which I think we ca= n agree will be
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 awesome for tsvwg.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > Seriously, ietf-wg-<wgname> seems fine.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > -Ekr
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Mark Nottingham &l= t;mnot@mnot.net
<= /span> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:mnot@mnot.net>> wrote:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > +1
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 7:53 am, Martin Thomson
= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <martin.thomson@gmail.com <mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com>> w= rote:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > > On 22 February 2017 at 19:22, Salz, Rich <<= a href=3D"mailto:rsalz@akamai.com" target=3D"_blank">rsalz@akamai.com =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:rsalz@akamai.com>> wrote:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > >> perhaps the IETF should reach out to GH an= d see about making
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 things more official and seamless.=C2=A0 For example, an IETF=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 organization and naming groups like ietf-wg-xxxxx.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > > FWIW, I'm discussing with the IESG about h= ow that might
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 proceed.=C2=A0 The
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > > IETF already has a github organization.=C2=A0 = I don't think that we can
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > > camp on a slice of the namespace, but will hav= e to accept that
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 names
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > > are vulnerable.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > > We're not that special, and I don't th= ink we need special
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 treatment.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > >
=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.o= rg/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/= listinfo/ietf-and-github>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=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 > > ______________________________________________= _
=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/ma= ilman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/= listinfo/ietf-and-github>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > >
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
=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 > _______________________________________________
=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>

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




_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-gith= ub@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf= -and-github


--94eb2c0d9e883a2c9b054927f458-- From nobody Wed Feb 22 16:50:57 2017 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 0B222129467 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:50:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 CGbVBPZuUECg for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:50:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-x231.google.com (mail-lf0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::231]) (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 F10D312946E for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:50:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-x231.google.com with SMTP id l12so9596879lfe.0 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:50:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=81qilnNg9ktU7wODPO5DRZzG5wzFkQwWSxkGMceoFrE=; b=Bp7NZPeuPRlf9kKtvED0x8TtqDg7wHBeeZLx3zup4RNyO671N4KPN5xq/Gxt7nZkVR XyJZUP9XT4UK2oDlSgcUzkRTzDre83IChNqru94Vyvp/9H6IbRXQbU0qAgADnwDnwZe1 9I+6AJpx973Rf03R9xei4XR+OLCCVlHpgvRPQzsMO1u6Mr50nEfDatrBafF3EqlV7wg2 0EiOTj+szIaIxHJYgWQs+8lRbVWmmMwSlwvP4EdYPJrgN6n9RCHwr48ekFOzczPQIoa6 W7IYR6gE3aombWoPnkQyVqNRELx7gb4IJ5/GRCUeGF4/Chv0OAZjU3CJeiuxENi4NGFB H46g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=81qilnNg9ktU7wODPO5DRZzG5wzFkQwWSxkGMceoFrE=; b=rHdDbvweppndOLeKDBZhlaXPin3aBhEd0yWPYT1KoynHlPGt4iN81LomCsokhCmVMn 2JeT5iYuCzjNZFfrhJZRysu4OGLs6p/UYa1fV5bbLVVEkbQfBdv8yxP+117qZSRY6c5r kdJ8OlVw3azYtjEH3cTCXneXkHz+ySifLuN3pD6QDIsx0OYUpkuefoVzWqNLXSmgEshQ C8eSvTPoM2T2y+a79TNfow0eSt2AGPSW4Eh7STEeNqZmVV0fR9bK0wlE2lKOqBmZWYti yCLDENNQQfSdECwqHp19xUPevI36iDR4VN4797hq8q02Nahr0ateceuWHm61oSvCDPCU wshg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mmmeC/wN5l+1ssg9/6uEwbWBG8+UoelRiJzIaBOhTnfL4Ieshc2616wHZ+uN5sydfW2Vk+8Ti9nnZSew== X-Received: by 10.25.129.147 with SMTP id c141mr9882884lfd.93.1487811051260; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:50:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.75.25 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:50:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> <57874645-0d9b-d58d-e7c6-2db0036a43dd@joelhalpern.com> From: Martin Thomson Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 11:50:50 +1100 Message-ID: To: Alia Atlas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "Salz, Rich" , Mark Nottingham , "Joel M. Halpern" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Eric Rescorla Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 00:50:56 -0000 On 23 February 2017 at 11:47, Alia Atlas wrote: >> Using the WG name in the repository so that Google searching is useful. >> But expecting folks to understand what they find there without finding the >> IETF WG information seems to me to be unlikely to be useful. > > > I'd have to defer to those who have been getting comments and reviews from > those who don't participate in the IETF generally. Martin may have a useful > perspective. I don't find that searching works for finding these sorts of things, except as a last resort. Even for search engines, links matter a lot. GitHub has recently added a tagging capability that might help us more than any naming convention: https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=topic%3Aietf&type=Repositories&ref=searchresults The results are already interesting. From nobody Wed Feb 22 17:20:09 2017 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 97C76129D61 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:20:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Op3KIF_DYBOM for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:20:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-x230.google.com (mail-lf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::230]) (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 C9B791294B0 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:20:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id l12so9796457lfe.0 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:20:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=wIiv9tassdPhN+VwLnkNLrC8viB8u0WIYMeXLmtWwsQ=; b=Gy6cvB9DK3QdIIsKmjZ7wVIUMr/mDUJ40thJfsMcFrIyn8pYnzrMSoT/mPANazx9SN ao1GgndSUijDoANL0uM0uSWtueIyHiG2K65jhUcS2A0+H22umBw8bkQuEGJK88Bfyvxc G0CxIx38kLB8Cq+L6eYAn2alz77CZCL/iJ5IS7uqsMYKdVLl9urFwqBvLVtJVP5gaiZE UNRDcW0pmanhuB8dMyG8BDFKzLjvWFYrPb9vaHALBLOsJe+DKxmhmZkXeLCaJ8HvByh3 EprPmtX+Mou8/sGE20sStIEsEIp9IjTTOHTHKE5B2VlhDO3O2iAyuyjKVUH+ZOwMXyPQ H7uw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wIiv9tassdPhN+VwLnkNLrC8viB8u0WIYMeXLmtWwsQ=; b=JNxPFDGONa4OgxDUNqd7CXK855hPMiCMmAI0PT0TLFN92ofh2VxudJspCnVjU3zX2i xOCiFQc8jjpGZtVy4d3mlMb46ZLJ2I33WrcGnMLmD1dGKL4+8+7ABQ9tlt0rbI275u5K p+Go0Eb5/gVsrp3KHbw3oO6WLbCitHn5UDzuU0t7+z2lqGC6oCulR7txH8d8Z1iz94Ue bYcsvVu5rfFJ6hnm/J3ycXDYz4ONheqafXj8CGzbAM0rmNq4oVfwF5R/qXqhHWd+J5ml YmuVaQvZwbCB2h74G/U7kilsUkbqNuULWbRoeHbLwa41QahShW/aqngsP5FBLdUFMzju 40qQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lPXrU+WGNV7x200Ko++mSmbCwriqXdPWkX+k4A8PjuWQb5sjUzmElgsvtzeCyL4tARlqm9BMNEKSpayw== X-Received: by 10.25.199.66 with SMTP id x63mr11152746lff.161.1487812801124; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:20:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.75.25 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:20:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <0e8c7cabf9d24f2390dd8a785fb6b1ae@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> <57874645-0d9b-d58d-e7c6-2db0036a43dd@joelhalpern.com> <0e8c7cabf9d24f2390dd8a785fb6b1ae@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> From: Martin Thomson Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:20:00 +1100 Message-ID: To: "Salz, Rich" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Alia Atlas Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 01:20:04 -0000 On 23 February 2017 at 12:16, Salz, Rich wrote: > So Martin says the name doesn't matter, but apparently it does matter to him, because he doesn't like the common prefix that I suggested which would make it easier for non-IETF folks to find "wow, look at all the stuff that the IETF does." I never said anything of the sort. I think that a convention is fine. A stricture isn't practical and that is what you get when you include it in a document. From nobody Wed Feb 22 17:23:10 2017 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 69D781294B0 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:23:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.702 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 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=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 baWNrqYPvmoQ for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:23:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com [96.6.114.98]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BA20129D52 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:16:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9531E496C31; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:16:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com [172.27.22.68]) by prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC0E496C01; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:16:31 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1487812591; bh=HM7YpHoq0uHK9Zd0yQ6dB95MgBYR5yEEeO8YbLOFrmg=; l=794; h=From:To:CC:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=UqqdW+VL2r8ybir9M56+E1jruXpxs4b/wYBP94GmLoBEfFse6gtG5CFuZlcL9Sdc4 7EVtkOnj0cZ8xWhuPtKy1CAR/GHetOOYyZs1n6Dr9p2fSf8cKNQxe9CALVxtM6nVeI TIEe6y9gbaNJmbs18lewHlOxXZ5DP/sLTDneWopM= 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 5D8241E08F; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:16:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 20:16:30 -0500 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, 22 Feb 2017 20:16:30 -0500 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson , Alia Atlas Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage Thread-Index: AQHSiXCFHf1qe6yyYESLk8sls5SD46F0EYqwgADDqwD//9nUUIAAWhYA//+tIXCAASYFAIAAMW8AgAAA4QCAAAFGAIAAAOuAgAAArQCAAAIogIAACHYAgAABnoCAAAECAP//sb9g Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:16:30 +0000 Message-ID: <0e8c7cabf9d24f2390dd8a785fb6b1ae@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> <57874645-0d9b-d58d-e7c6-2db0036a43dd@joelhalpern.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: [172.19.43.207] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 01:23:09 -0000 PiBJIGRvbid0IGZpbmQgdGhhdCBzZWFyY2hpbmcgd29ya3MgZm9yIGZpbmRpbmcgdGhlc2Ugc29y dHMgb2YgdGhpbmdzLCBleGNlcHQgYXMgYQ0KPiBsYXN0IHJlc29ydC4gIEV2ZW4gZm9yIHNlYXJj aCBlbmdpbmVzLCBsaW5rcyBtYXR0ZXIgYSBsb3QuDQoNClNvIE1hcnRpbiBzYXlzIHRoZSBuYW1l IGRvZXNuJ3QgbWF0dGVyLCBidXQgYXBwYXJlbnRseSBpdCBkb2VzIG1hdHRlciB0byBoaW0sIGJl Y2F1c2UgaGUgZG9lc24ndCBsaWtlIHRoZSBjb21tb24gcHJlZml4IHRoYXQgSSBzdWdnZXN0ZWQg d2hpY2ggd291bGQgbWFrZSBpdCBlYXNpZXIgZm9yIG5vbi1JRVRGIGZvbGtzIHRvIGZpbmQgIndv dywgbG9vayBhdCBhbGwgdGhlIHN0dWZmIHRoYXQgdGhlIElFVEYgZG9lcy4iDQoNCk1hcmsgaXMg Ym90aGVyZWQgdGhhdCBmb2xrcyBtYXkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIG5hbWUgaW1wbGllcyBzb21ldGhpbmcg b2ZmaWNpYWwgd2hpY2ggSSB0aGluayBpcyBib2d1cy4gIE1hcnRpbiBwb2ludHMgb3V0IHRhZ2dp bmcsIHdoaWNoIGlzIHVucmVzdHJhaW5lZDsgTWFyayBhcmUgeW91IHdvcnJpZWQgYWJvdXQgdGhh dD8NCg0KDQo= From nobody Wed Feb 22 17:44:43 2017 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 13AC71294B5 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:44:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 bkzMe_EyCAIU for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:44:40 -0800 (PST) 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 8D3671294B4 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:44:40 -0800 (PST) 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 83ACD22E253; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 20:44:32 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <0e8c7cabf9d24f2390dd8a785fb6b1ae@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:44:29 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <74302E0E-E25D-451C-AB13-8DFC3981EAC4@mnot.net> References: <4bb58c77d46a488fbad6243854fa803a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <9ff7cd24b6b641ac859a6f4ad70bb16f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <852E60A9-526C-4EE6-A61A-889FC87D84F1@mnot.net> <0D809843-621B-40F1-B49A-B0A749D13510@mnot.net> <55B028AE-8BE4-4AB6-9764-1523B4CAB4EA@mnot.net> <57874645-0d9b-d58d-e7c6-2db0036a43dd@joelhalpern.com> <0e8c7cabf9d24f2390dd8a785fb6b1ae@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> To: "Salz, Rich" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Martin Thomson , Alia Atlas Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Draft/proposed BCP on GitHub usage 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, 23 Feb 2017 01:44:43 -0000 > On 23 Feb 2017, at 12:16 pm, Salz, Rich wrote: >=20 > Mark is bothered that folks may think the name implies something = official which I think is bogus. OK, nice to know... > Martin points out tagging, which is unrestrained; Mark are you = worried about that? No. I'm not concerned about what happens in places that we don't = control; I'm concerned when we act like we do control them. Each WG is = going to need to find a name that works for them, within the constraints = of what's available.=20 As I have said, I'm OK with advice or a suggestion for a good name here = (as common senses dictates; "QUIC-WG" is better than "xwhevhw7w"). = Requiring a particular structure with RFC2119 language isn't = well-matched with reality. -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Sun Feb 26 19:07:54 2017 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 AA3BE129646 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:07:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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_NONE=-0.0001, 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 bTuDctY6mK3n for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:07:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pg0-x232.google.com (mail-pg0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::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 2E7CE129649 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:07:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg0-x232.google.com with SMTP id s67so37433283pgb.3 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:07:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=to:from:subject:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+2DmxgdCJrrsaCl37hDbSUJMSDq9ul40XN8VK/e6NlM=; b=glDlDIJdrVmANDb499IRoYV2hkgwgBGDF9x34QwL7lhzV3G2dxaOAL1mRAnk6fTJ0e 7Fdiz/KluQxh16BI0XDRqg3BzjJ3VgH1lTAvCaDVW1WvfYPaSjXz+W5C1JKzkqsmnoCY RIi8JZhjgBGTx23lo+duhjMgD3Y5R/x12ReVvFC7d7ubjTL3xvsgi/5uv03ZHP/2cscy VBXmq1KhIHVfQdRR7vAWoZRtUFjxBY2Vv1i3xokBdQ5GmG3/kJ2xOGROBxwNuFOPSHYO pS28L2NPgM+NoD6CnxaoAo8ecGxyYpCdNY97/6OwBdmbzSg4aY2XL/hxjaz+/oTsvLT5 D62A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+2DmxgdCJrrsaCl37hDbSUJMSDq9ul40XN8VK/e6NlM=; b=WXG/rza3ZpidiQS+Vsg7b3I5TN7VNgzTf9I+3Puull8OCteQGzvPrXiQdL/QKG2dfQ DODQN1D2vZyay/WwUhwfcbGFDC0pl74rakP3tFNDmOeP4CLM7rvsW5LEeIJY4aE1s7E0 6dJKc+X30fGurM3BZPJ8RnYTLbKZ9JtcMhEJm/EzVExUzF+nfyK+6C5wY1V6TtfyWeMK dzH/GhiD4vVOwh/lxD9GJ+8Lf7Xr91VUqVFiJVj6Us1vELq6xzrwqKbgrBTkaTZf6zdO gXspacFPTNXVsohdjMQQRSdEOXTWMuKsO6Awla7oIj/YgyvA/TX+euXbcUKdBVygcKOm IsAw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nFwcpZRz8dASqRU+1Y81Aj0DixgPLpRS3YPH51XbGWO+hcYkRmFHyHm77688ODNA== X-Received: by 10.98.215.23 with SMTP id b23mr17914634pfh.87.1488164870583; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:07:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:521c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:521c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y5sm27039226pgy.28.2017.02.26.19.07.48 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:07:49 -0800 (PST) To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:07:44 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 03:07:53 -0000 Hi, First, thanks for starting this. I really think it's a mistake to aim immediately at BCP. We're learning. Time enough later for firm rules, beyond the IPR text we already got from the IESG. > The words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", and "MAY" are used in this > document. It's not shouting; Yes it is, IMHO, while we are learning. > 4.1. Issues ... > Working group chairs MUST decide how the GitHub issue tracker are > used. Use of the issue tracker could be limited to recording the > existence of issues, or it might be used as the venue for substantial > technical discussion between contributors. No it might not; that would be a direct violation of IETF process since it isn't on the WG mailing list. (Unless you want all issues to be automatically cc'ed to the list, but we know how painful that can be.) So if issues are discussed on the GitHub tracker, they have exactly the same status as design team discussions: the result must be referred back to the WG as a whole, i.e. the mailing list. > 4.2. Pull Requests > > Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request > changes to a repository. A user does not need to have write access > to a repository to create a pull request. A user can create a > "fork", or copy, of any public repository. Forks in IETF documents are evil, and when they happen, they can lead to significant annoyance, including lawyers in at least one case some years ago. So while there might be some utility in this approach between cooperating editors, the idea of having arbitrary WG participants making their own forks and pull requests seems terrible to me. > Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather > than commiting directly to the "master" branch of the repository. It baffles me why that could ever be a good idea. There's no analogy with why you might need this approach for open-source software. If they are the document editors, they should just edit the document. > Critically, using > pull requests creates a record of actions taken. So does an ordinary commit. > For significant changes, leaving a pull request open until discussion > of the issue within the working group concludes allows the pull > request to track the discussion and properly capture the outcome of > discussions. Still makes no sense to me. The WG should debate the issue before the text gets updated. And the proper venue for that discussion is the WG mailing list. Forking the document would make the WG discussion confusing. > 4.2.2. Merging Pull Requests > > Working groups MUST determine who is permitted to merge pull > requests. They do that by apointing document editors. > Document editors SHOULD be permitted to merge pull > requests at their discretion. There's no "should" about it - it's their job. Bottom line: IMNSHO, using pull requests at all is probably a mistake. > 6. Internet-Drafts > > During the development of a document, individual revisions of a > document can be built and formally submitted as an Internet-Draft. To be clear, state that this is with version number += 1. Since it's bog standard IETF process, I'm not sure why it's even mentioned. > This creates a stable snapshot and makes the content of the in- > progress document available to a wider audience. > > Editors SHOULD endeavour to create a new Internet-Draft submission > two weeks prior to every session s/endeavour to// This is the editors' main duty, after all. Don't legislate the deadline; WG Chairs often set a specific deadline. So s/two weeks prior to/in good time for/ Regards Brian From nobody Sun Feb 26 19:57:24 2017 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 6A43C1296C9 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:57:22 -0800 (PST) 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 D27enDmnlQPg for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:57:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw0-x22f.google.com (mail-yw0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::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 0E24E1296B9 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:57:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yw0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id d1so18349965ywd.2 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:57:21 -0800 (PST) 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=Ii3et7RUZ7ME/Hef1ZUuY0lG8Y7H0LV3IQKmI4mtk5w=; b=UTUt0EK82GDaYY3IZUFoOHuxrwT49vbqN2uEKiaBMUYfF6rjTekcUGAPuFc1HqySt+ V05qxnmcRcQBwz/mno5EiuepqlCTOKYtT5fW/8szu6taDSIg9IV9bWv4xXI5oeWf5GYK KdROFJpr8Q1/3UNHK8yIDq19jMAExjAYbvhJoqTNFPKO3f05xQORyjlxE9N6DeW721IF maVWC89LKhnd2X5aoiFDKLbwDCarj8K0p4tv3EoRn9lxmW4aqzkubFq+kO+pYZoE4vVb V/t0lHt7vF4RBl81e888ZyaxeoN4IYUMWTRztAqnNrPz/YpJgMwQVjtWBK6aK46Phczq 4o3w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ii3et7RUZ7ME/Hef1ZUuY0lG8Y7H0LV3IQKmI4mtk5w=; b=INSn/TuSW+6gfreXdj2hscl9Y/YzqcdFuE1AUfQCE4PNXRggiw8aA4Mm71hHFk3VFW JoA4pVU7xDTG2ZoDcVmCikz6+wbS/snkaxR1jzT+co+qUQ6Gsq4AvGkyfeftOdihfagi E7bd3TzMZ7/7zR2pSsp5EMAKpOboxPSMJqUoxFIWJa5GITo7WeL6/PUad8VdJeZVb/Aa Xx0j3PQbIWbHpQQFaGsVVJpksmtjS1miJoT1hJvr4JRE5yiqXs3rbmfIi7aT2CMiS5Rq kJblatU5MuzoTghY+KnHr/ENogqqhF6q/uASicNhFa4JTUeecFHm13P/+tlsk7cSsmAK FNUg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nXbMm4z0xN0IhtlY7E+1kkiOiA2a7tX0/z6wLbXkB0dJgWWLkG6TWCKZJi3PB+b4ziwGwPRas8qXvW/g== X-Received: by 10.129.162.151 with SMTP id z145mr10911720ywg.337.1488167840249; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:57:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.154.210 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:56:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Eric Rescorla Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:56:39 -0800 Message-ID: To: Brian E Carpenter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c11555e7c138c05497b1347 Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 03:57:22 -0000 --94eb2c11555e7c138c05497b1347 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Brian, I think a number of your comments reflect a misunderstanding of how people in practice work with Git. On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter < brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 4.2. Pull Requests > > > > Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request > > changes to a repository. A user does not need to have write access > > to a repository to create a pull request. A user can create a > > "fork", or copy, of any public repository. > > Forks in IETF documents are evil, and when they happen, they can lead > to significant annoyance, including lawyers in at least one case some > years ago. So while there might be some utility in this approach > between cooperating editors, the idea of having arbitrary WG participants > making their own forks and pull requests seems terrible to me. > Because Git is a DVCS, the basic idiom for submitting a proposed change to a repo is: - Fork the repo - Make a branch for your change - Submit a PR that asks to merge your branch into the main repo's master. While this is formally a fork, it's not a fork in the conventional sense of an alternative document that has its own lifecycle, it's just the version control mechanic you use to propose changes. One of the main virtues of working with Github is that it allows people to submit the precise change they are requesting and the editor can just merge it in. Forks and PRs are the way that Github does that. The alternative is either abandoning precise changes or making everyone able to write to the repo. Neither is desirable. > Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather > > than commiting directly to the "master" branch of the repository. > > It baffles me why that could ever be a good idea. There's no analogy > with why you might need this approach for open-source software. If they > are the document editors, they should just edit the document. > There actually is a very concrete analogy to Open Source software, which is that in many projects even committers are required to have their changes reviewed, so they create PRs for other committers to review and merge. > Critically, using > > pull requests creates a record of actions taken. > > So does an ordinary commit. I would urge you to take a look at the way we have used PRs in the WGs that use Github already. In general, even when the editor proposes something, they do a PR and then there are comments on the PR which eventually contains several commits. The PR is the construct which ties them together. > > For significant changes, leaving a pull request open until discussion > > of the issue within the working group concludes allows the pull > > request to track the discussion and properly capture the outcome of > > discussions. > > Still makes no sense to me. The WG should debate the issue before the text > gets updated. And the proper venue for that discussion is the WG mailing > list. Forking the document would make the WG discussion confusing. > Again, I think you're misunderstanding the role of the PR here, which is that it's a specific proposal for how the text ought to be updated. And in practice, we haven't found that it makes the WG discussion confusing. Bottom line: IMNSHO, using pull requests at all is probably a mistake. > You are of course free to believe this, but given that PRs are one of the primary benefits of Github, and this is the workflow the rest of the world is used to, this seems an awful lot like saying you don't think we should use Github. You are of course, also free to believe this, but given that this document is targeted at WGs which have decided to use Github, that doesn't seem like a very useful piece of comment. -Ekr --94eb2c11555e7c138c05497b1347 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Brian,

I think a number of your comm= ents reflect a misunderstanding of how people
in practice work wi= th Git.


On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> 4.2.=C2=A0 Pull Requests
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to = request
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 changes to a repository.=C2=A0 A user does not need to ha= ve write access
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 to a repository to create a pull request.=C2=A0 A user ca= n create a
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "fork", or copy, of any public repository.

Forks in IETF documents are evil, and when they happen, they can lead
to significant annoyance, including lawyers in at least one case some
years ago. So while there might be some utility in this approach
between cooperating editors, the idea of having arbitrary WG participants making their own forks and pull requests seems terrible to me.

Because Git is a DVCS, the basic idiom for submitti= ng a proposed change
to a repo is:

- For= k the repo
- Make a branch for your change
- Submit a P= R that asks to merge your branch into the main repo's master.

While this is formally a fork, it's not a fork in the c= onventional sense of
an alternative document that has its own lif= ecycle, it's just the version
control mechanic you use to pro= pose changes. One of the main virtues
of working with Github is t= hat it allows people to submit the precise
change they are reques= ting and the editor can just merge it in. Forks
and PRs are the w= ay that Github does that. The alternative is either
abandoning pr= ecise changes or making everyone able to write to
the repo. Neith= er is desirable.


>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial cha= nges rather
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 than commiting directly to the "master" branch = of the repository.

It baffles me why that could ever be a good idea. There's no analogy with why you might need this approach for open-source software. If they
are the document editors, they should just edit the document.

There actually is a very concrete analogy to Open So= urce software,
which is that in many projects even committers are= required to have
their changes reviewed, so they create PRs for = other committers to
review and merge.

> Critically, using
> pull requests creates a record of actions taken.

So does an ordinary commit.

I would urge yo= u to take a look at the way we have used PRs in the WGs
that use = Github already. In general, even when the editor proposes
somethi= ng, they do a PR and then there are comments on the PR
which even= tually contains several commits. The PR is the construct
which ti= es them together.=C2=A0

=C2=A0
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 For significant changes, leaving a pull request open unti= l discussion
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 of the issue within the working group concludes allows th= e pull
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 request to track the discussion and properly capture the = outcome of
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 discussions.

Still makes no sense to me. The WG should debate the issue before the text<= br> gets updated. And the proper venue for that discussion is the WG mailing list. Forking the document would make the WG discussion confusing.

Again, I think you're misunderstanding the = role of the PR here, which is
that it's a specific proposal f= or how the text ought to be updated. And in
practice, we haven= 9;t found that it makes the WG discussion confusing.


Bottom line: IMNSHO, using pull requests at all is probably a mistake.
<= /blockquote>

You are of course free to believe this, but= given that PRs are one of the
primary benefits of Github, and th= is is the workflow the rest of the world
is used to, this seems a= n awful lot like saying you don't think we should
use Github.= You are of course, also free to believe this, but given that
thi= s document is targeted at WGs which have decided to use Github,
t= hat doesn't seem like a very useful piece of comment.

-Ekr
=C2=A0
--94eb2c11555e7c138c05497b1347-- From nobody Sun Feb 26 20:14:10 2017 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 7A6C0129706 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:14:08 -0800 (PST) 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 5XlWf1tt9llB for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:14:07 -0800 (PST) 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 E062C129705 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:14:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id o64so4795877pfb.0 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:14:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=368a5fVrDevJtfMJiaMNvVK2BdMv/TJHznBLoCCEig4=; b=G+x7xHWGTs8rCnwropa6tRR7dYf+9B6HdOYRBbqBayOsv1p7mzN23i5NObA4vTfUT1 Zg2A5NJfQDDWZ1d7fuhrvCqriuK11YYHathUad8JWBFiZugSJ0ZI0S8B4g2QDeXx/QwE TsTj42c0O2P/MQXETVLfU6x4i6t5FQOo7NUe/GWy+TzxWfoBV5kO089SR43nsFhTnd+H ibR5uB5gitTMBWcCXZul1POXEhJK0Hr01pW6yAyPQs7smamaVrLa6qezAbuNIl4ev/fY GTl4dOUqnIMAPjQdXs/+o96+VwPmMGcSrUWFxrnRYLZSAugx/8BCnUVutS/fCowrlO5x FCAw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; 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=368a5fVrDevJtfMJiaMNvVK2BdMv/TJHznBLoCCEig4=; b=H0Da8DBqaB7vWO6LCjwdEVW9G33D28lngBxBQGQq74aGsQN3gZdbdba75UXRY+nVNV zsfTBZYcqLBA3p3xkYXi5+WLlvu4wTpvY8l6oRAXbc/hq3QupzpGd7GfS5WogMTe7OU0 Q+WIygWSypEh4CjeMWqig6xXZoGeCp6Zpbnm+INU5REW3zE19vZa97DuqKip4/UWESAY Hbr1B/QighQwB6sa+Wj016R6j2YSCXB9FuB5B1pvOHTF9VLl3t82JCqM1BOlxQQSKrzt Rj3XV6EUC1Bbu19Pe2C4XitZvaEWe9I3yQaL9KQzrHEJmN8pBaoC/4DvXo/rWKQeZ5ar dgQw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mrmtrKriZQ1F4phF8A0ztqF1hx7s284VGJJ0+txqQCvjfRy1GG1ldRnX6n3Zf/bw== X-Received: by 10.84.209.194 with SMTP id y60mr21312742plh.115.1488168846370; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:14:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:521c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:521c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e68sm10013408pfa.85.2017.02.26.20.14.04 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:14:05 -0800 (PST) To: Eric Rescorla References: From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <1b0b3958-660c-99b4-a001-a6baceb07db1@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:14:01 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 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] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 04:14:08 -0000 Eric, I'm not arguing about the technical description below. My concern is that it doesn't merge seamlessly with current WG process; in fact it creates a two-speed process where people using git are doing things on the fly and the other WG members will see stop-motion video. So it works for a design team. I just don't think it works for a complete WG. If it was described as a design team tool, I'd be much happier. I must admit that none of the repos I've used for drafts have used pull requests, to my knowledge. So far we've used conventional methods for proposed changes. Regards Brian On 27/02/2017 16:56, Eric Rescorla wrote: > Hi Brian, > > I think a number of your comments reflect a misunderstanding of how people > in practice work with Git. > > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter < > brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>> 4.2. Pull Requests >>> >>> Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request >>> changes to a repository. A user does not need to have write access >>> to a repository to create a pull request. A user can create a >>> "fork", or copy, of any public repository. >> >> Forks in IETF documents are evil, and when they happen, they can lead >> to significant annoyance, including lawyers in at least one case some >> years ago. So while there might be some utility in this approach >> between cooperating editors, the idea of having arbitrary WG participants >> making their own forks and pull requests seems terrible to me. >> > > Because Git is a DVCS, the basic idiom for submitting a proposed change > to a repo is: > > - Fork the repo > - Make a branch for your change > - Submit a PR that asks to merge your branch into the main repo's master. > > While this is formally a fork, it's not a fork in the conventional sense of > an alternative document that has its own lifecycle, it's just the version > control mechanic you use to propose changes. One of the main virtues > of working with Github is that it allows people to submit the precise > change they are requesting and the editor can just merge it in. Forks > and PRs are the way that Github does that. The alternative is either > abandoning precise changes or making everyone able to write to > the repo. Neither is desirable. > > >> Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather >>> than commiting directly to the "master" branch of the repository. >> >> It baffles me why that could ever be a good idea. There's no analogy >> with why you might need this approach for open-source software. If they >> are the document editors, they should just edit the document. >> > > There actually is a very concrete analogy to Open Source software, > which is that in many projects even committers are required to have > their changes reviewed, so they create PRs for other committers to > review and merge. > > >> Critically, using >>> pull requests creates a record of actions taken. >> >> So does an ordinary commit. > > > I would urge you to take a look at the way we have used PRs in the WGs > that use Github already. In general, even when the editor proposes > something, they do a PR and then there are comments on the PR > which eventually contains several commits. The PR is the construct > which ties them together. > > > >>> For significant changes, leaving a pull request open until discussion >>> of the issue within the working group concludes allows the pull >>> request to track the discussion and properly capture the outcome of >>> discussions. >> >> Still makes no sense to me. The WG should debate the issue before the text >> gets updated. And the proper venue for that discussion is the WG mailing >> list. Forking the document would make the WG discussion confusing. >> > > Again, I think you're misunderstanding the role of the PR here, which is > that it's a specific proposal for how the text ought to be updated. And in > practice, we haven't found that it makes the WG discussion confusing. > > > Bottom line: IMNSHO, using pull requests at all is probably a mistake. >> > > You are of course free to believe this, but given that PRs are one of the > primary benefits of Github, and this is the workflow the rest of the world > is used to, this seems an awful lot like saying you don't think we should > use Github. You are of course, also free to believe this, but given that > this document is targeted at WGs which have decided to use Github, > that doesn't seem like a very useful piece of comment. > > -Ekr > From nobody Sun Feb 26 20:27:38 2017 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 A1CB9129717 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:27:37 -0800 (PST) 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 jpfhVbhdgME3 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:27:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yb0-x236.google.com (mail-yb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::236]) (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 8FFCA12970A for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:27:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yb0-x236.google.com with SMTP id a5so16332501ybb.2 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:27:35 -0800 (PST) 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=4ba1kkIy0yI8fDJxH+0Zb9GhlbCQJLkLYqv86HdK9yY=; b=PrgTYfWETUSEGS+GSRpjWKDSQimJIeo8ghtPgLMsaxKZE74kYoV/GpcWGzyboQcSU9 hkyJnuPlz/8xcpp39JSKEJPdBaUu5VqNFfTrVAbHa9NwcXpvDZ5vLUHKuIA3Vpjf8lXL 5VErLdsM9gEyA5sgIks1LWqhRcEATdqnQ24Suo/IPo25rYWCxuIlHnLFt6RYbGokhGmg A6/Ooi57VSpYx8IfQ5UEH5288qLT4pAIf+tnuo0m7nWU8MHZ/r8lX96RdsvsQAod/M0W dmTFH9bcvwTg/uIfMlTkR6UTpph6kA9Oufbl6ciOkDoV8LjKY6IptTddO3l90u//SqL2 i22A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4ba1kkIy0yI8fDJxH+0Zb9GhlbCQJLkLYqv86HdK9yY=; b=X6c6/WV5AM/gkdjBVcTsCCfWy/DxmcbNhT8fghbrsjePM06iE+n9sLh3Dg0eRuHBgj h9bS9ry9Jnk9fLrxCQaIXXcUcF6sn0VqY1PHQsW4qnEVUcsH/JxGfVyN0qNS6kPP5rI/ 4KykSkweiJMvg7XD2MNlyDS/9wnAneXa/INSB/DG+YcefrQQW0tCU63RVzb5hglrot+G sx+u4aSYs9XWYFBoyeiXWEVA5hfJWesmyY/9NfOz69IalxbW4fCdfzeQ0uAzOHShMgjw /etNgGbFeLdRU639MhlWe8krrIB0ohUAcBUvyYRi7t5W3JHW5TSg9ipA14dWKglRfiAU k8rg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mJsptOUFKF2CInPdW41n2TAHqGMncvWEY9isEYccILlJyASfdj/iRspA/nDk/N3jVjQdlW2C2HKTHSoQ== X-Received: by 10.37.97.210 with SMTP id v201mr3754715ybb.65.1488169654782; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:27:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.154.210 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:26:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1b0b3958-660c-99b4-a001-a6baceb07db1@gmail.com> References: <1b0b3958-660c-99b4-a001-a6baceb07db1@gmail.com> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:26:54 -0800 Message-ID: To: Brian E Carpenter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1142ed04a3a70205497b7f36 Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 04:27:37 -0000 --001a1142ed04a3a70205497b7f36 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 8:14 PM, Brian E Carpenter < brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > Eric, > > I'm not arguing about the technical description below. My concern is > that it doesn't merge seamlessly with current WG process; Yes. Part of the point of using Github is to have a process which is faster and more efficient, as well as to bring in people who already have experience with this model. To be clear, I believe that the use of Github in this way is entirely consistent with RFC 2418, it's simply not what the conventional practice pre-Github was. > So it works for a design team. I just don't think it works for > a complete WG. I'm not sure what to tell you here. We've got a lot of experience with using Github in WGs now (HTTP, TLS, ACME, RTCWEB), so we don't really need to theorize about what the impact of these practices is. In my opinion (and I suspect that of most of the active participants of these WGs), it's a pretty big improvement. As I said, you're free to think otherwise, but the target of this effort is -- or at least should be -- those who want to use these practices for their WG, and primaily need a template to start from. If it was described as a design team tool, I'd be > much happier. > That's not how we use it. -Ekr > I must admit that none of the repos I've used for drafts have > used pull requests, to my knowledge. So far we've used conventional > methods for proposed changes. > > Regards > Brian > > On 27/02/2017 16:56, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > > > I think a number of your comments reflect a misunderstanding of how > people > > in practice work with Git. > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter < > > brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > >>> 4.2. Pull Requests > >>> > >>> Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request > >>> changes to a repository. A user does not need to have write access > >>> to a repository to create a pull request. A user can create a > >>> "fork", or copy, of any public repository. > >> > >> Forks in IETF documents are evil, and when they happen, they can lead > >> to significant annoyance, including lawyers in at least one case some > >> years ago. So while there might be some utility in this approach > >> between cooperating editors, the idea of having arbitrary WG > participants > >> making their own forks and pull requests seems terrible to me. > >> > > > > Because Git is a DVCS, the basic idiom for submitting a proposed change > > to a repo is: > > > > - Fork the repo > > - Make a branch for your change > > - Submit a PR that asks to merge your branch into the main repo's master. > > > > While this is formally a fork, it's not a fork in the conventional sense > of > > an alternative document that has its own lifecycle, it's just the version > > control mechanic you use to propose changes. One of the main virtues > > of working with Github is that it allows people to submit the precise > > change they are requesting and the editor can just merge it in. Forks > > and PRs are the way that Github does that. The alternative is either > > abandoning precise changes or making everyone able to write to > > the repo. Neither is desirable. > > > > > >> Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather > >>> than commiting directly to the "master" branch of the repository. > >> > >> It baffles me why that could ever be a good idea. There's no analogy > >> with why you might need this approach for open-source software. If they > >> are the document editors, they should just edit the document. > >> > > > > There actually is a very concrete analogy to Open Source software, > > which is that in many projects even committers are required to have > > their changes reviewed, so they create PRs for other committers to > > review and merge. > > > > > >> Critically, using > >>> pull requests creates a record of actions taken. > >> > >> So does an ordinary commit. > > > > > > I would urge you to take a look at the way we have used PRs in the WGs > > that use Github already. In general, even when the editor proposes > > something, they do a PR and then there are comments on the PR > > which eventually contains several commits. The PR is the construct > > which ties them together. > > > > > > > >>> For significant changes, leaving a pull request open until > discussion > >>> of the issue within the working group concludes allows the pull > >>> request to track the discussion and properly capture the outcome of > >>> discussions. > >> > >> Still makes no sense to me. The WG should debate the issue before the > text > >> gets updated. And the proper venue for that discussion is the WG mailing > >> list. Forking the document would make the WG discussion confusing. > >> > > > > Again, I think you're misunderstanding the role of the PR here, which is > > that it's a specific proposal for how the text ought to be updated. And > in > > practice, we haven't found that it makes the WG discussion confusing. > > > > > > Bottom line: IMNSHO, using pull requests at all is probably a mistake. > >> > > > > You are of course free to believe this, but given that PRs are one of the > > primary benefits of Github, and this is the workflow the rest of the > world > > is used to, this seems an awful lot like saying you don't think we should > > use Github. You are of course, also free to believe this, but given that > > this document is targeted at WGs which have decided to use Github, > > that doesn't seem like a very useful piece of comment. > > > > -Ekr > > > --001a1142ed04a3a70205497b7f36 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 8:14 PM, Brian E Carpenter &l= t;brian.e.= carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
Eric,

I'm not arguing about the technical description below. My concern is that it doesn't merge seamlessly with current WG process;
=

Yes. Part of the point of using Github is to have a pro= cess which is faster
and more efficient, as well as to bring in p= eople who already have
experience with this model. To be clear, I= believe that the use of Github
in this way is entirely consisten= t with RFC 2418, it's simply not what the
conventional practi= ce pre-Github was.

=C2=A0
So it works for a design team. I just don't think it works for
a complete WG.

I'm not sure what to tel= l you here. We've got a lot of experience with using
Github i= n WGs now (HTTP, TLS, ACME, RTCWEB), so we don't really need
= to theorize about what the impact of these practices is. In my opinion
(and I suspect that of most of the active participants of these WGs),=
it's a pretty big improvement. As I said, you're free to= think otherwise,
but the target of this effort is -- or at least= should be -- those who want
to use these practices for their WG,= and primaily need a template to start
from.

=

If it was described as a des= ign team tool, I'd be
much happier.

That's not how we use= it.

-Ekr


I must admit that none of the repos I've used for drafts have
used pull requests, to my knowledge. So far we've used conventional
methods for proposed changes.

Regards
=C2=A0 = =C2=A0Brian

On 27/02/2017 16:56, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> I think a number of your comments reflect a misunderstanding of how pe= ople
> in practice work with Git.
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian= .e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> 4.2.=C2=A0 Pull Requests
>>>
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow u= sers to request
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 changes to a repository.=C2=A0 A user does not ne= ed to have write access
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 to a repository to create a pull request.=C2=A0 A= user can create a
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "fork", or copy, of any public reposito= ry.
>>
>> Forks in IETF documents are evil, and when they happen, they can l= ead
>> to significant annoyance, including lawyers in at least one case s= ome
>> years ago. So while there might be some utility in this approach >> between cooperating editors, the idea of having arbitrary WG parti= cipants
>> making their own forks and pull requests seems terrible to me.
>>
>
> Because Git is a DVCS, the basic idiom for submitting a proposed chang= e
> to a repo is:
>
> - Fork the repo
> - Make a branch for your change
> - Submit a PR that asks to merge your branch into the main repo's = master.
>
> While this is formally a fork, it's not a fork in the conventional= sense of
> an alternative document that has its own lifecycle, it's just the = version
> control mechanic you use to propose changes. One of the main virtues > of working with Github is that it allows people to submit the precise<= br> > change they are requesting and the editor can just merge it in. Forks<= br> > and PRs are the way that Github does that. The alternative is either > abandoning precise changes or making everyone able to write to
> the repo. Neither is desirable.
>
>
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial= changes rather
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 than commiting directly to the "master"= branch of the repository.
>>
>> It baffles me why that could ever be a good idea. There's no a= nalogy
>> with why you might need this approach for open-source software. If= they
>> are the document editors, they should just edit the document.
>>
>
> There actually is a very concrete analogy to Open Source software,
> which is that in many projects even committers are required to have > their changes reviewed, so they create PRs for other committers to
> review and merge.
>
>
>> Critically, using
>>> pull requests creates a record of actions taken.
>>
>> So does an ordinary commit.
>
>
> I would urge you to take a look at the way we have used PRs in the WGs=
> that use Github already. In general, even when the editor proposes
> something, they do a PR and then there are comments on the PR
> which eventually contains several commits. The PR is the construct
> which ties them together.
>
>
>
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 For significant changes, leaving a pull request o= pen until discussion
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 of the issue within the working group concludes a= llows the pull
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 request to track the discussion and properly capt= ure the outcome of
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 discussions.
>>
>> Still makes no sense to me. The WG should debate the issue before = the text
>> gets updated. And the proper venue for that discussion is the WG m= ailing
>> list. Forking the document would make the WG discussion confusing.=
>>
>
> Again, I think you're misunderstanding the role of the PR here, wh= ich is
> that it's a specific proposal for how the text ought to be updated= . And in
> practice, we haven't found that it makes the WG discussion confusi= ng.
>
>
> Bottom line: IMNSHO, using pull requests at all is probably a mistake.=
>>
>
> You are of course free to believe this, but given that PRs are one of = the
> primary benefits of Github, and this is the workflow the rest of the w= orld
> is used to, this seems an awful lot like saying you don't think we= should
> use Github. You are of course, also free to believe this, but given th= at
> this document is targeted at WGs which have decided to use Github,
> that doesn't seem like a very useful piece of comment.
>
> -Ekr
>

--001a1142ed04a3a70205497b7f36-- From nobody Sun Feb 26 20:59:37 2017 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 E2C75129875 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:59:35 -0800 (PST) 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 DRizzKPM1Hv2 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:59:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from JPN01-TY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-ty1jpn01on0116.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.93.116]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FD9F12941E for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 20:59:30 -0800 (PST) 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=/oW4PLhxfJ90xdNnHV7UmMcLAilTXU3Ph9+DHj1mwIU=; b=j3vc4nSCWvNvQ0Sf7xdtUZJzKL+ZLE5QYIcgnEWHcrlHucs6Q2yKm63YMgQCyqoDqsMAGGUC8qjzpAXkdj8UGUEurrMo8xiXxCbNV/KxnqtaZw+4lHLNe9XXtNPgYyHSr9HusQPri9oEY4o2BoozB0k8VQF1+wS/734xenUP058= 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 TYXPR01MB0653.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com (10.168.43.140) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.933.12; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 04:59:26 +0000 To: Eric Rescorla , Brian E Carpenter References: From: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_J._D=c3=bcrst?= Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University Message-ID: <05a7990c-b928-c2db-a662-c5570bab8478@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 13:59:24 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 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: TY1PR01CA0112.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com (10.167.154.30) To TYXPR01MB0653.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com (10.168.43.140) X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 58276bf6-b3f5-43a6-cb82-08d45ecd67c8 X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(22001);SRVR:TYXPR01MB0653; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; TYXPR01MB0653; 3:DkLzbo4AL+USxlP/XURsyTcgTWiZ3PUfYd5tokFaH+l9thKvq/f3O/iV6m/RBV9+Wf1GDvMlTSzKSBW+n5g1UQy0zi0Tdk2inpE1f0uhdrf7k/gf3x02Y1zdoabZ7TCePmDApgOeOl0hxNlBBU/HQxYmejfM9nP5NF9aGOLX1upwlx6E8OrcRKkOPWk0mH3PCyoKRJkOzKbNDxRldzV6h5w8CyvyX2iwykrJIgBsS99Qq3c/JceLcCqG9WI3fhDCKTICW3Xoknq8+gVkW2gkBg==; 25:Ns5u5jljZs/7tYdlhWMYiPPXltm6SNE+zRRdwLf+m9jsN+EDkoWL1hDaPj8YZco62Xvhwt8WDHdYWoIREu2QTrLTjf9+Gs604PvbWJBO3qjaq79bd5gQaQRr9QqplaEGTLmhGYqdpG81XTXBhdVCwH9EeKrMCWUO0fnmuntDdg8c603/vlfU1KGBjeuaIttpRk98DH3v0s9d7qxDYxT1vnjcXdEe5/QucBG+3jPQGiz3Q3ytvhVDEUpHftX+LkF3V047ecTHgkTWsUdv01LfpJriEsC5vQxlLP2SQ3NZnifEaWKzpaX4I3qN+FXZBtMvuc0LqHbbAR0LntYvb2UqeHvAdfObtaM//JIE72Y1IIoLGn1+Ihz/2D3wo2aXf8JYH1ueVdsCogvsjkyLc36KGY0Yxo7mkld8OZnrQPus0fxVmA+dARMaAa8naZhnoO0BF6LNwQDnvZoNzedy4zzPjw== X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; TYXPR01MB0653; 31:Z894WkgOy9IGkpkPgi9Wizi4ORNWdKgihvqtpjAt9qGt7OskDVxX+TATxwsfD+uqPFhdVd26LmEzj9F15YbOiQ0Abw6T1yyrp0vVU/1xuvk0tte4XUVtSRls20j9+UVL5J4Fe+NB6civNztYUFjZUMiWB1YNcmVBgSjrZvka0wjO44a5R8HdtTHqqYKhZQLuRnbZeFXh0EOKpLlCKKJm67t3Z7A1aDnB3eLCcIJE1twLy+fOv8edgMFI6WMfqPNsThHVL2bVPJLsbqYzipk34Q==; 4:X/2nSqAUituglHlIOR43xoFxo+2ZUeTDB81zTM62hUTuxnyNZz6ro70WhwOTR3sLh292eSiaRETxUbuSH0WDnFGIgy5T5ueVRZfWevVwaBKHzTN74D6etUOfmxNr72mIoA9s/JPTXYv2te1T1+wiF422qOTeujNfKJRJ3ummkHXW/zkevApYHxCLBw0C5vQOhFRs1TSH99T3ANjmwBOMXpG79bTLDBrE/YCQI1PxOJKsGJwKYdsN1O4LVx5aSj7uEsZlPhHYThecmd1JmRN98SO5y0d71KTM8vRr64BsVqTV4SfQvgxEW087iOKssp1AOK+iUopeMD4P8s/ZAJUobGGNnwMPUohf4dnueKgx63QHC7feSUNnh/cDpiVcm7x/KszBYT5uYc5RJKouDWOx2KG1rV4N7X6NLLC6xPTNDlXOPaZ0yxNd9Uj/MrkOWiQPCCHrqtUiZ27gU9kUuFRzjWpoqUQVaJYsKZF/B4qEAjVh9xphYrY9gL3f8F9QIxih7HdlylE84Q6qPcQUpq8VYsXzQFdNhYTVRoqgWrq/ljyRmIshAbYzI9T4g+h5viO2J5KHLmZ0U14fwJtU4R53DOQyQiPGo31HS/Cx2iS5XAo= X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040375)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001)(6041248)(20161123555025)(20161123562025)(20161123560025)(20161123558025)(20161123564025)(6072148); SRVR:TYXPR01MB0653; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:TYXPR01MB0653; X-Forefront-PRVS: 02318D10FB X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4630300001)(6009001)(6049001)(7916002)(39450400003)(189002)(199003)(377454003)(24454002)(6246003)(81156014)(38730400002)(81166006)(65826007)(50466002)(230700001)(230783001)(47776003)(23676002)(8676002)(65806001)(66066001)(65956001)(83506001)(68736007)(229853002)(31686004)(64126003)(86362001)(53936002)(3846002)(31696002)(5660300001)(6116002)(53546006)(42186005)(105586002)(90366009)(92566002)(106356001)(6486002)(4001350100001)(76176999)(54356999)(7736002)(4326007)(50986999)(74482002)(2950100002)(305945005)(33646002)(2906002)(189998001)(97736004)(42882006)(25786008)(101416001)(3940600001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:TYXPR01MB0653; 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?MTtUWVhQUjAxTUIwNjUzOzIzOjFJcG5Cc0RZOWhyMkZwcGw3cWVZUWdPSGhV?= =?utf-8?B?eTZLWjdZZ3VrWXkwODhzQTFEL1R5Z09SWjlqbTY1TERkMi8wenE5U3ozb3VI?= =?utf-8?B?WnBjZk85UWYwaUpxTDlKdllSWWE4ZXpIbnMxRDJocGNaVnU0VXhwMTJtZGVT?= =?utf-8?B?bCt6dEJtQkdacnVZZEhpWktsWWVLRzVmTjFReEJrS0JLNk9PcDdCQUhEQ2Vk?= =?utf-8?B?dlpvN2U2NzYrZHNEZmZmWDczZ3c4ZmtIYXRweDRBajgxTG1XbHVYL2ZMd290?= =?utf-8?B?aVJsaTdyUkxSaGxjTnRQejJFUUFnZmJSRHUyamJsOHVOZTMrUWFDcGdMdTM1?= =?utf-8?B?RXNLaHhLeEZEVzdFY3ZRLzZ5VEJtNDdHczNzTHVhWERUY1d2Rkp3SGRncW93?= =?utf-8?B?VGZrdUEyNS9FSGh0K3J6NkFGNVo2WXZHclZnL0JYWFRacDNieGZrRTEwMDhN?= =?utf-8?B?ZUVtb0ZmMDJDYVZkc2syVHQvUDdxL0I4aWxmbTQ3eTZ2REZlcUF2bFNQWkl1?= =?utf-8?B?c0xnWUFvNk84QS9ZWXFaU3lFRTBQS0wzU3lZUkJmRG94UFhlYi9NcWFPeXNB?= =?utf-8?B?em15eEFoRlZvSDY5dFdwQ203LzhvWmpVNjhnZWtQM056Qy9WbWM1SFN3RDZO?= =?utf-8?B?U0pkYlRGdm5aZjhIU1JYNjFyZlJobEEzQUloWG56Q21UL3JBNkRuWE5OYmpt?= =?utf-8?B?c1FsOXBWTVRmU0tNSDFPNEhVdWVQN0FtUktwUm9PeFFUcmQzUU5MdUpTRS9F?= =?utf-8?B?Umg4QUlnQXBycEtubFFVUCtlSHptbGJHWktadjltMkVRSU92eFFtWVBZYnkx?= =?utf-8?B?U1UzV1ZWb1Z5WUJzdyttV0xtTktmQ2V3endaNUVCNnNGL1ZNeUhxYlIzK3VO?= =?utf-8?B?WUVZd1ZBVXJTelV0c3lNVWhSM1ppNTFTcG5odFlXNkdTQ1ZYbmdaU0Eyc3Zq?= =?utf-8?B?djBseC92R0tHb3NjbjJseXNaT3k2bnZKVzhrRko5WU81Sjh5c01CbEVEcWtp?= =?utf-8?B?Q1AxN0FKZ0gwZ1NEdjJkYUpkelhsTE1QREJpd3A4TGNsWjNCOTRxSEtmOEww?= =?utf-8?B?c05yYTFaZld5TG9LZkJKbmxqNXlzbXJFajZmM3NZejByM1RlcGllY0d2S05P?= =?utf-8?B?a2ViR2RmSEg4ZnByOENKYm10VTUvS2tweUZFcCtBRGMwMTBpd0VqMng2aHVN?= =?utf-8?B?T24vbHJublVQSUZqV2pkUWpTSWJRVkh1L05haUZaVWYzSGlISVhZTk9VVVRJ?= =?utf-8?B?bm4xbXM5ZUFLZ1NkYWZENjZ6UWJMdkl2OW5lMG1QVkVLenJYMnJTZ1NEcUE4?= =?utf-8?B?VGxUUmxBNlBxK3dMMDhxU2VuTU5waGoyUzVtKzdkWGRKQmE5YXNWNXYrOTBs?= =?utf-8?B?aGQvR3NJQ1Q1Z1JZbjFyWVhHeGtiT1FSQjJSdE4vRHV4OUhrb1VCSStsTnRN?= =?utf-8?B?YWtRSWRLYy8xd0x3OTdEcWJRYkVMUmwvdmM0dkI1UUxNR0lhTnF5ZC9PSTNS?= =?utf-8?B?WGdEaHZsYjRBN1pUT0FMdkhkd1NjKzZTMzV1c3NRUEl3WjJlaVd1amw5VWtw?= =?utf-8?B?bzJqSXY0VGRRdEJBeGtMeTBDa1NLWU9CUzNiRm1rSGtyakRKWGI3R0duNGFm?= =?utf-8?B?dHREZGJDVFNpMit5dGNBTnc1cUEzSmRLZzdybmRDdXRvRiswVGFyYkZpejEv?= =?utf-8?B?QTEwZXBjNGlGTzhsNTRWVUR3UWVncWlqbkpXY0ZQMkRqL3FWU2p5bDBZdkU0?= =?utf-8?B?cmgyNXdVRVlDYXFwdk9KUlhISUZPSi9SSmQ1QjkrYytqZExXZGNuSm8ranBM?= =?utf-8?B?UzN1TG1RaHNlK0dtOXlxR21Ca1lJL21jMnZsZnRnOGRqa2hnVlN3V2xISG92?= =?utf-8?Q?fgo1cEia1Gw=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; TYXPR01MB0653; 6:u//ubrhusIO2f5Dqa4MuC6+GXgCrWzUFWh4jViCQNYn2k/iKm9AdBbz6v+scTeeOm8qQ/B4NXC7vMYGzTilj0GH1Lx0OMCjKyz9ws0AeQ7r42tKid4fC/dArfCjf/MJDGzBTkG7FH1psSvxTIf95fvb8R7ba9xZQjwJInj6Yh7LWdjJRld/l2RvaMJBa1JV69OWWt5HDydrQgs2zordLTIuRBRVyZpb7aJAnXS7qxB0pgTNAwIW+kg7lnjT+9+peozJqtNZ8K0Bco8UWaNxvghrfWzJOAVdRSOSGDXfdtrjs/LwufokxFXhU9V76ujI1WrLXUkQ23qWPVufjkP4fh1/Mphiaz3Eqn8o25L5TXWh4saqmX8oNfo9NGGOFotOpaQ6M+aGrRCE2DmVGgWzqHg==; 5:nhqg3riX2VCJoYyer1qwC+BaALkyBl6Hj9M8PD3SY/cJQv3WnUEcgW0hDa38l7VgHv6MXmScQJ0KfE4v0CFG2cbNATgYqOLM5/gng9SmB60PTlaROcbXcnbjyeQqam2/RdcKmauM/ZWgDYhIgQ25wOmTjGWF4FwAvsxbgOjOr0U=; 24:TZ6q4DmWhdMxbBmh6rseKqBRHH0/LtDYMgWunHFNbOpcIgcyYwpmS9WEyNOAZQSejYtUezaenxZ3xmOs6h44AU7j9+KW+ZFdFQIMDWDhG+A= SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99 SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; TYXPR01MB0653; 7:0h2pHUF0npTnxP9eyt2Ep9wPdzcMGCMii5HqsjAwpTau+x7DdsZDtYdVKMJHY7pOqsbOnIySdX1oEZS/upqAoTbkS01XrN6vR7xmH9novnfuXSak5AvlVhnEiJnHmbUHzxNlQy8QUWuhUrIXqZniuAXOZKI1CwY43z1fRGcfhEppp6jEVmrmcGtaDpEd70UWjuiaq506iQJDuZWayVdEv8nyUdIX7lJ79AOb611FopRvVJn14FzyE5dbPHXuQdM5t6JwD5/eo1uNkD8CDhMmLYZhkK+aLeL2V+TDcT8yMr1khrXc5Yoe4DlNYIItPwd/6/Ik7VA1DlJaD4njz8LeMw== X-OriginatorOrg: it.aoyama.ac.jp X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Feb 2017 04:59:26.7664 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: TYXPR01MB0653 Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 04:59:36 -0000 Hello Brian, Eric, On 2017/02/27 12:56, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter < > brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 4.2. Pull Requests >> Forks in IETF documents are evil, and when they happen, they can lead >> to significant annoyance, including lawyers in at least one case some >> years ago. > Because Git is a DVCS, the basic idiom for submitting a proposed change > to a repo is: > > - Fork the repo > - Make a branch for your change > - Submit a PR that asks to merge your branch into the main repo's master. > > While this is formally a fork, it's not a fork in the conventional sense of > an alternative document that has its own lifecycle, it's just the version > control mechanic you use to propose changes. For people with experience with github, that's well understood. But because this document will be read by a wide range of people, it should make clear that this is only 'technically' a fork, not intended to be an actual forking in the process. [This is doubly important because github makes the first fork-branch-PullRequest cycle very easy, but any subsequent synchronization of the personal fork with the upstream master (of the WG) is extremely non-obvious. Even employees of github have admitted that to me; they have even told me that internally, they have something like a "catch up" button, and they have plans to make that available in the public version. Alas, that was last September, but I have yet to see such a button.] > One of the main virtues > of working with Github is that it allows people to submit the precise > change they are requesting and the editor can just merge it in. Yes indeed. That's a great improvement over the old "OLD" / "NEW" style of change requests or any other way of trying to express changes in words. In most cases, it's easier for the proposer (because there's no need to talk about an edit, you just do it) and for the recipient (if things look good, you just push a button. It also matches the "please send actual text" maxim used in the IETF. Regards, Martin. From nobody Sun Feb 26 21:55:14 2017 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 CABDB129B21 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 21:55:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 wTeccCb2hqYP for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 21:55:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 55A64129B1E for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 21:55:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v1R5t7sT021309; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 06:55:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.217.124] (p5DCCCDC2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.204.205.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3vWrXC549HzDHW2; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 06:55:07 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 06:55:07 +0100 X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 509867706.993555-403f8ec5346476f4dcec25a3066b2674 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <1b0b3958-660c-99b4-a001-a6baceb07db1@gmail.com> To: Eric Rescorla X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 05:55:12 -0000 On 27 Feb 2017, at 05:26, Eric Rescorla wrote: >=20 > That's not how we use it. Interesting discussion. To me, the fact that there are different points of view is an expression = of the fact that IETF WGs do differ. A lot. Some WGs use the github process to coordinate work across the entire WG. = Some might want to use it mainly to coordinate work among the authors = of a document, with good transparency to the WG (and possibly the = occasional PR coming from outside the group of authors). It is probably a good idea to find names for these different approaches, = this simplification of the discourse on how a specific WG wants to work = could be an important purpose of the present document. (The choice between one of these approaches may be to a per-document = granularity, not homogeneous per-WG. For WGs that have a single = deliverable, that may not make a difference.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Feb 27 10:59:50 2017 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 BCD2012A2CD for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:59:48 -0800 (PST) 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=nomountain-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 qXH3clFStDQL for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:59:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pf0-x230.google.com (mail-pf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]) (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 E129112A2C6 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:59:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id 89so5999278pfi.3 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:59:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nomountain-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to; bh=ep5Bw9UAXE+huLB77nUS0m6Y0MFNdG88a5A3OWavMJ8=; b=K2FuBjWjRmjA3NgXtwE31vCmLAEr8EhWTjeztheLzAj/ASwMSnAorq5YmsulMg2jLN nicjzXUO9FpQR+/Vxlo9Lhd5P6w5IA1r/AJbwZCSIwUka+4tiOZOT4Kzx3n2W7ZN6Gtf IzOtEJn+CVrM7rzV8/F/TpRXcGpJAmKjIH5ovsvB5ED99cAjPHQPWvxC9JkuSD/Ghvaa WSXacR8npKoIz+0z2qxgaIw6yjHHr3tDvQsNwpjigUGnB9VAtpGRLt62dMYMNOFHOsH8 Dx9JMNq33lHknVtuBr8TTrGY+RjV0gQqgmyt8VWuiNFnjK4P2El6LobRLpQ7mRGrLoZR mHFA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=ep5Bw9UAXE+huLB77nUS0m6Y0MFNdG88a5A3OWavMJ8=; b=Tg8Vfq+7n1MwuLp4uA2S5koOcH5jy8PEgnvfo7fRyvrPc6aL5WNRPdzhrWd33Ythtl 1U7SUFgTt8yy3167HeFqIJl34IaIyS+QAdFKIuJThaCZy1614wpbptX31d/EwUsPyX8+ xq5RdNn4EIs1XW5r7CsVZXlYVEsDAkC/dMlasCQn2sptquKWt9OzZLSQTcUXFM4U3Lwi PicqTdkHU6nKub3vpRdgMEeOSsSB1aek1O62FsFtYnZZiSL0U0Bx8whnRX4DvSFpjHew VZ41id20jRjOMXeIHckPDE0Xy0HDNRf0rr3vlfELbF5q2+yUYVVuUsI0PGBtW1MH7dUq 9EGw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kr+J91imERhqB4Dh4Di6Y3Jon+b24rdfNjhtPi0H3Sn1lATLp771eTGAgUZKdxRQ== X-Received: by 10.84.233.193 with SMTP id m1mr26529403pln.118.1488221987270; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:59:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from Melindas-MacBook-Pro.local (63-140-87-209-radius.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [63.140.87.209]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t184sm32289898pgb.11.2017.02.27.10.59.45 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:59:46 -0800 (PST) To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <05a7990c-b928-c2db-a662-c5570bab8478@it.aoyama.ac.jp> From: Melinda Shore Message-ID: <58aecb5f-82fe-1c02-7e82-37f2bfdaadc9@nomountain.net> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:59:41 -0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <05a7990c-b928-c2db-a662-c5570bab8478@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IuOOtU5J97esRnMICDc6edgMABugjPcDC" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 18:59:48 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --IuOOtU5J97esRnMICDc6edgMABugjPcDC Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="50DsmauUj4rlrqVG4GhvBClkkEvXKGTng"; protected-headers="v1" From: Melinda Shore To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Message-ID: <58aecb5f-82fe-1c02-7e82-37f2bfdaadc9@nomountain.net> Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 References: <05a7990c-b928-c2db-a662-c5570bab8478@it.aoyama.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <05a7990c-b928-c2db-a662-c5570bab8478@it.aoyama.ac.jp> --50DsmauUj4rlrqVG4GhvBClkkEvXKGTng Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think this is a somewhat weird discussion, because as I read it the draft is not prescriptive. That is to say, it's not telling working groups to use github but rather to give them some guidance for when they do. I personally feel rather strongly about working groups and other IETF teams using the tools that work best for them as long as they're free, open, and available to all participants, and (in some sense) auditable. Guidance for those who choose github seems reasonable to me. Melinda --50DsmauUj4rlrqVG4GhvBClkkEvXKGTng-- --IuOOtU5J97esRnMICDc6edgMABugjPcDC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYtHcdAAoJELiGRpM6HoEu6vEP/i7NQtDfxzxMloIbJ0P7gQcZ Xjg43wVcwKXfzdBb3I6tsBPavitdLcAeOJfGSooMgBx5D/zPpmLAja0SL81f0Gbq 08HUFA7HeldlYSJu7Bhsa+pUMcOToltJoBuSZSK+CDApyEyk74m3lPejbDdmvuU8 pQ4xe9/F95+Ic1UXEOb0KDW4lc6GGGjM7seFt+H+WZ+JuwpVWwJnHlaXMwRXbV2L dbjHV6UQtLXP1u+MEoi4xkLgRzjZ0hpfx3vuzhnioFMxloPYWnsS2Wbbf5pWOTlh bt6GQpl2jwZqFFEaQT+P1Ly4xPodKPfAiww14QynD/2yiqL1FPWrOoMI78Z5XaZy D9XUcZyCeC3r2Zz9b+8RDpawk7ObkZBXddsb6QYfoy8fsWOP1oWrbCVPYtLFg4AK Y5kfUFoKXCbF1H/P7uMe31IE5dj3feW/w8EVHwbrJbZWtMftVEcU8qgFABUiELfm uFkSGAT+NZTX0CN/O3Tf3lcFaTflvd8iPLDbg+QdLVy7but6E6olxVP7STER+xbA IWECaS9lqXRN16KHF62VWu5Asp7WyYoSCEwzQpiOOrRnGkMBJSiiD+H5Mz6tk+f9 2+FjAzkZVOrx1K/86WL8EEz6DzqLATluOTenNqCV4P0XYGYcfBo3/WW0m/m/8IIq QhKlysgnY/2X2FB9hB5H =FhjM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IuOOtU5J97esRnMICDc6edgMABugjPcDC-- From nobody Mon Feb 27 11:17:57 2017 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 9DAF612A2F2 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:17:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 BIp7t68dhSWS for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:17:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pg0-x229.google.com (mail-pg0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::229]) (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 3769F12956F for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:17:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg0-x229.google.com with SMTP id p5so24024476pga.1 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:17:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=L0gc+I154vYCW/T+c43TWBp3hrK1+PLhAcf0KwiiVsY=; b=L8hDNwlphaw/b86sNmYX5+HlA4z5BITSFOZJLjWUrxYKD5YwFidoZo7iG8EGtJvvCC 25AVTV2nCfb0oUe/vz0rsKNsoXnb217aXbPbFyKzcpF1T4HicCC9iFtwRHqfrecFb0Eb UbI0u4gvKlTs5rbu34DQj1by907dFIIdk+meOWR2Xp6ni3uiwsq2S9i0WbpY0TXVES1v 4SeC/1sLUM7Zi6GL8TlvBtOjfKjTBu8GPno70LmBXAv7CGbsKsYX0wg7Jhaq+/Ihkrk0 0LhAmSY2Bxf08Wam52rAoPj4ZY4VgLOeDkccL07zzCLxL81bXBpVKYJzmHvoeafsM2dZ cX7g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; 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=L0gc+I154vYCW/T+c43TWBp3hrK1+PLhAcf0KwiiVsY=; b=LoA6GWaYlgSEMXZ3H53qXjpme1fZqwhettu1RyrhqSKAuU58WXZbCuupImsN+/NdJ3 KJ1DWWR8jUpCFVkWTtYI64WWGEyT21azGYPmHe2SGvLeRjBYK0SXxwDj2TLF3XxfkFia 82gw0VX/Q1HnjQ3MsJQWP3Z1Ti9QadPFGOjd6LO3YR8MdKvkqhZR8CJk4a4bDqCEV1uN ngINDpyURsbigKLVGP6qquvvhaLEkb91KOWXNUxQBHs1pAL5nAJDoRNsw0453+73S9KK pZ98R3rbR7SRSNt+1blRPuqHoP3cEccXnZmgmrXsXpk/3LsWsoa76fRDFIpkmM9yckl5 yc8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39k6fu7+R2DW8uT0S4gznF4Cs0G9NzTjGTzQym9nrfsMu5PDqNOZZEtZ2HRcrCnuEA== X-Received: by 10.84.179.99 with SMTP id a90mr10682707plc.26.1488223073797; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:17:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.178.21] ([118.148.75.173]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h17sm32096822pfh.62.2017.02.27.11.17.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:17:53 -0800 (PST) To: Carsten Bormann , Eric Rescorla References: <1b0b3958-660c-99b4-a001-a6baceb07db1@gmail.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <62371939-6e60-30e7-f6f7-a598f8c72372@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 08:17:50 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 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] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 19:17:55 -0000 On 27/02/2017 18:55, Carsten Bormann wrote: > On 27 Feb 2017, at 05:26, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> >> That's not how we use it. > > Interesting discussion. > > To me, the fact that there are different points of view is an expression of the fact that IETF WGs do differ. A lot. > > Some WGs use the github process to coordinate work across the entire WG. Some might want to use it mainly to coordinate work among the authors of a document, with good transparency to the WG (and possibly the occasional PR coming from outside the group of authors). > > It is probably a good idea to find names for these different approaches, this simplification of the discourse on how a specific WG wants to work could be an important purpose of the present document. > > (The choice between one of these approaches may be to a per-document granularity, not homogeneous per-WG. For WGs that have a single deliverable, that may not make a difference.) I fully agree with Carsten. Different teams may have different preferences on how to use the toolset. On 28/02/2017 07:59, Melinda Shore wrote:> I think this is a somewhat weird discussion, because as > I read it the draft is not prescriptive. That is to say, > it's not telling working groups to use github but rather > to give them some guidance for when they do. That's really the problem with it being phrased as a draft BCP. I really think it should be phrased as suggestions and advice. > I personally > feel rather strongly about working groups and other IETF > teams using the tools that work best for them as long as > they're free, open, and available to all participants, and > (in some sense) auditable. > > Guidance for those who choose github seems reasonable to me. Absolutely. And there are at least two models: lightweight, where GitHub is simply used as a basic repository, and the all-in model that Eric has described. My concern about the all-in model is that it makes the WG almost inaccessible to people who are not accomplished GitHub users. I assume that means most people. Brian From nobody Mon Feb 27 11:27:26 2017 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 4DCDA12A301 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:27:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.698 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 17fXNPAoWpvK for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:27:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm0-x22c.google.com (mail-wm0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::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 411F312A2FF for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:27:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id t18so19993896wmt.0 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:27:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qZoz6svhi543tQ/bHeu1Uww7jCrxGj2zRP1feh07TPo=; b=c9pKcwpbOQMgIHiqsGt6B7Nl8W2AtnVzvg9HFJ5jraAyo9tk5lvjDGaMEE9pD9JtFy UVv0ZlE9E7/bfkA6KGEpFXzbRsYCxRVxCD96OFnLp7AIo4BWtrQRI60MgRhxdeRww+M7 a56OVD2hoVsq43ynfULezv7BY9FpClpjM6Y68s6PqTDeWWABKaau807/hZnivEUAZWY/ h0dvgplaakv4KEpnu7Je3jwzedQKlW/FxJFdsaqDaApSFf7c4JuFqtHHn6EPBc6aeIYA jt7dn+RfJ57mUarMHIm+h61JhwhvSuYgGsiYgSwX1Uv9N8OQacfsCPZvfoaLyHtSry8q cTSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qZoz6svhi543tQ/bHeu1Uww7jCrxGj2zRP1feh07TPo=; b=LQeO8c97548IiMCIOottm7Ojy3WQ0WlPQv8kNhbyq67fw5+gwCv/rc/vzkyFJY/aed IZhwGgtkxOm5rR4+S7RdnQ3pHS3zIobVh6vabIXqmQHrK7prvoNPaEMsfjd8n8RpI1/8 x2XKHOqawRZ9xx3V2VwXg1CxGBfADUuJkxYsGQ6msTFqEpAaVJjixKY6C9zNGy1B9+jq aI72ovgLx8DgD6lHj9e81FSYPAorG+5Vr+AvTGiHwBvNKR3hN0kyDy2yxxXhqq6viPb4 B01zMokx7KlMzl8XX0VO9iISlLb4uowVFxatf6q2dGp2+mhplm4cgusVcFB5pB28hdsv tr4A== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39njxgLzZJjhT7AKG33OvjGwghbsTxB2oNL+PFwl29B1nyYnrMJFo5X8HDwdxBTFfdohXB2cGBOczh5hLQ== X-Received: by 10.28.19.207 with SMTP id 198mr14236033wmt.70.1488223633547; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:27:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.163.202 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:27:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <62371939-6e60-30e7-f6f7-a598f8c72372@gmail.com> References: <1b0b3958-660c-99b4-a001-a6baceb07db1@gmail.com> <62371939-6e60-30e7-f6f7-a598f8c72372@gmail.com> From: Alia Atlas Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:27:13 -0500 Message-ID: To: Brian E Carpenter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1145b3f00644e70549881102 Archived-At: Cc: Carsten Bormann , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Eric Rescorla Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 19:27:20 -0000 --001a1145b3f00644e70549881102 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Brian, On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Brian E Carpenter < brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27/02/2017 18:55, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > On 27 Feb 2017, at 05:26, Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> > >> That's not how we use it. > > > > Interesting discussion. > > > > To me, the fact that there are different points of view is an expression > of the fact that IETF WGs do differ. A lot. > > > > Some WGs use the github process to coordinate work across the entire > WG. Some might want to use it mainly to coordinate work among the authors > of a document, with good transparency to the WG (and possibly the > occasional PR coming from outside the group of authors). > > > > It is probably a good idea to find names for these different approaches, > this simplification of the discourse on how a specific WG wants to work > could be an important purpose of the present document. > > > > (The choice between one of these approaches may be to a per-document > granularity, not homogeneous per-WG. For WGs that have a single > deliverable, that may not make a difference.) > > I fully agree with Carsten. Different teams may have different preferences > on how > to use the toolset. > > On 28/02/2017 07:59, Melinda Shore wrote:> I think this is a somewhat > weird discussion, because as > > I read it the draft is not prescriptive. That is to say, > > it's not telling working groups to use github but rather > > to give them some guidance for when they do. > > That's really the problem with it being phrased as a draft BCP. > I really think it should be phrased as suggestions and advice. I believe there are aspects that need to be BCP - such as how to tell others that the WG is using GitHub or GitLab and where, how the GitHub notifications can be transparently sent to the mailing list, and so on. Other parts are advice, obviously. > > I personally > > feel rather strongly about working groups and other IETF > > teams using the tools that work best for them as long as > > they're free, open, and available to all participants, and > > (in some sense) auditable. > > > > Guidance for those who choose github seems reasonable to me. > > Absolutely. And there are at least two models: lightweight, > where GitHub is simply used as a basic repository, and the all-in > model that Eric has described. > > My concern about the all-in model is that it makes the WG almost > inaccessible to people who are not accomplished GitHub users. > I assume that means most people. > I have poked a little at GitHub; it is not necessary to be very accomplished to see what is going on and participate. I am concerned about transparency and fate-sharing. Regards, Alia > Brian > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > --001a1145b3f00644e70549881102 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Brian,

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Brian E Carpenter = <brian.= e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
On 27/02/2017 18:55, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2017, at 05:26, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>>
>> That's not how we use it.
>
> Interesting discussion.
>
> To me, the fact that there are different points of view is an expressi= on of the fact that IETF WGs do differ.=C2=A0 A lot.
>
> Some WGs use the github process to coordinate work across the entire W= G.=C2=A0 Some might want to use it mainly to coordinate work among the auth= ors of a document, with good transparency to the WG (and possibly the occas= ional PR coming from outside the group of authors).
>
> It is probably a good idea to find names for these different approache= s, this simplification of the discourse on how a specific WG wants to work = could be an important purpose of the present document.
>
> (The choice between one of these approaches may be to a per-document g= ranularity, not homogeneous per-WG.=C2=A0 For WGs that have a single delive= rable, that may not make a difference.)

I fully agree with Carsten. Different teams may have different prefe= rences on how
to use the toolset.

On 28/02/2017 07:59, Melinda Shore wrote:> I think this is a somewhat we= ird discussion, because as
> I read it the draft is not prescriptive.=C2=A0 That i= s to say,
> it's not telling working groups to use github but rather
> to give them some guidance for when they do.

That's really the problem with it being phrased as a draft BCP.<= br> I really think it should be phrased as suggestions and advice.
=

=C2=A0I believe there are aspects that need to be BCP -= such as how to tell others
that the WG is using GitHub or GitLab= and where, how the GitHub notifications
can be transparently sen= t to the mailing list, and so on.

Other parts are = advice, obviously.

=C2=A0
> I personally
> feel rather strongly about working groups and other IETF
> teams using the tools that work best for them as long as
> they're free, open, and available to all participants, and
> (in some sense) auditable.
>
> Guidance for those who choose github seems reasonable to me.

Absolutely. And there are at least two models: lightweight,
where GitHub is simply used as a basic repository, and the all-in
model that Eric has described.

My concern about the all-in model is that it makes the WG almost
inaccessible to people who are not accomplished GitHub users.
I assume that means most people.

I have= poked a little at GitHub; it is not necessary to be very accomplished to= =C2=A0
see what is going on and participate.=C2=A0 I am concerned= about transparency
and fate-sharing.

Re= gards,
Alia


=C2=A0
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px= #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Brian

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

--001a1145b3f00644e70549881102-- From nobody Mon Feb 27 12:34:51 2017 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 AF7DE12A320 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:34:49 -0800 (PST) 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] 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 CZT8sgkFCr_W for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:34:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw0-x229.google.com (mail-yw0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::229]) (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 77C0712A31E for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:34:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yw0-x229.google.com with SMTP id p77so45071933ywg.1 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:34:48 -0800 (PST) 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=Qr/42L9KufPzpJzty0MxP0R3zRDUKhoJ05TCh2ppHVM=; b=M4SiJPRUZTjuuMnNi9V2SjxemZrIfhiT2b4d375YcVelGc1oD6vXJsF+Yi7gpSfOx5 9VNoXcehYFaalykALAQ9BRxjCOYUZnVuizgYxN1h9aJRWztopngTyseViSJut3yXFrLS nwMWR62yT7fwURAHUBTdsHHf6dIwodPEZqqYbCM0fBnhg5ELbYemOKKbuZS3L0vz+F09 aDplpV9TJiWU1P2dVeA3Uab/kAgMO8aONfU5t6Occ0wjA8RCrPl+bsYH91otuNB68sTr TCK6Mx4HOwp28nqjK4iIweTGjVgy6Pms+9+452ZV6wmnVBFmgzCud2oYl0rEjppcmuan w3tg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Qr/42L9KufPzpJzty0MxP0R3zRDUKhoJ05TCh2ppHVM=; b=ZCYmPljHquOoIvjKLi44rGknJnrvo276FZgSbm9jCXb8Xzk+N/4Wj++vUme2fl2gMq UTRUMjMgEgKzTlW+sk3FUF9cDvy+IrdBFKGWgw1KwT+upPysa6ssBCnR5+kVkU+TSElZ bICWKtGcX7oIkOJrjS4BD+WPZgYXkt2mK+xAotzmEYJI263r6MKxQiiOSpKuaDjBnNKt e9I+P3S5h2b0S4yGfOtAdrcQSH2ohWq4kYuGyaJivIvRpBQSP53d33tv+tQhlLS/urqF eh0srcV4Pyumx/E+dOPFC6RWkqJLbzznk3uCgT1wyRObdWpKj7285DcK9q6rJpsE3IoP b3NA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mJOWvZdeS/MVnV3TSIkOK+06jMAxLwfxO3xvoH/JyToSx+UaHPUjNRAPqiKXpm8KE83BnapYeLrQAPjg== X-Received: by 10.129.125.5 with SMTP id y5mr10191650ywc.120.1488227687683; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:34:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.154.210 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:34:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <62371939-6e60-30e7-f6f7-a598f8c72372@gmail.com> References: <1b0b3958-660c-99b4-a001-a6baceb07db1@gmail.com> <62371939-6e60-30e7-f6f7-a598f8c72372@gmail.com> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:34:07 -0800 Message-ID: To: Brian E Carpenter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11493644abd47d054989027e Archived-At: Cc: Carsten Bormann , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 20:34:49 -0000 --001a11493644abd47d054989027e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Brian E Carpenter < brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > > My concern about the all-in model is that it makes the WG almost > inaccessible to people who are not accomplished GitHub users. > I assume that means most people. > > I don't believe that this is true. Do you have some evidence for this from WGs which have used this model, or is this just a theoretical concern? -Ekr > Brian > --001a11493644abd47d054989027e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On M= on, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpent= er@gmail.com> wrote:

My concern about the all-in model is that it makes the WG almost
inaccessible to people who are not accomplished GitHub users.
I assume that means most people.


I don't believe that this is true. Do you have s= ome evidence for this from
WGs which have used this model, or is = this just a theoretical concern?

-Ekr
= =C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Brian

--001a11493644abd47d054989027e-- From nobody Mon Feb 27 15:42:30 2017 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 AD4B2129431 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:42:28 -0800 (PST) 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 430U5ChMRtop for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:42:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pf0-x230.google.com (mail-pf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]) (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 70BEE12941D for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:42:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id j5so8839444pfb.2 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:42:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=N9sAgQNILWxcP8XXwGx/8Qle/DbcNrF2xEJqz7JUXXI=; b=PmOfLufnSV/6CLzqssRr4GhfXeDjatS58jBFd29E70v0cWZlbbiaERhsK3CAMfh8+O /yJbcHwxi4Pq05sz/Rq+xh39ys4fQ7bA+2tMtKDqI2J3shzs27WLw4gwnU8vd+v35ojj qzfQ7G5Q8depa9WThMhH49vYGWQShFzOD4egLPlSvXogikM33nes+5TVZMDMtdJW9S/Z C2gntcjwWwBb8DtDU0tR1dD4na30819HNkbFYWf2KolZGyxMQjeNiEJg59YSuNmexBk3 QBZYzaS1B/LRc4vLKCtrY9sf4kCcqIz2iVpk0HAznSGeu4+aPmFU+Jh0WmJbpK5A6puC ikSQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; 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=N9sAgQNILWxcP8XXwGx/8Qle/DbcNrF2xEJqz7JUXXI=; b=BgzF5pomEBE7HDmx7cgmJrFcIdMK2DzUiA99IUv1wYOHGhJTk6RKb0sYlR0UwPhzqD G1J+oe/xUAKvX+hBW5oqsMwyYeaBiGz5GAvm7KouqCVAphP5gKpjJM+jfOTrhymT5KzG MDktJj2WP6iBOlZKUo/QYl3dWp5gyILjzBu3RTVg9whS0vQHr2OfSeE4s983CL1SsLpQ r5s7v+/9VORdLGei0KaJ7Hu76EIzV/CfD+6knjutkJ+5q5NVvEfal5H36BLKkoTxELdB GnJ1p5ciRYDw0X4rTHt4gZF4446X6cPj76LWBoPNuGfcWCwlZ43q/xm8F1DFghiZE10Q lxkA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nQxgfKZ5wjxDEfFjZq83ydUxFtMqQGsDZaaNG2Pm80ZHD/8//3nIE9/1ZLgka93w== X-Received: by 10.99.146.7 with SMTP id o7mr23792737pgd.6.1488238947085; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:42:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from [130.216.38.132] (sc-cs-567-laptop.uoa.auckland.ac.nz. [130.216.38.132]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u80sm1076092pgb.32.2017.02.27.15.42.24 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:42:26 -0800 (PST) To: Eric Rescorla References: <1b0b3958-660c-99b4-a001-a6baceb07db1@gmail.com> <62371939-6e60-30e7-f6f7-a598f8c72372@gmail.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:42:02 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: Carsten Bormann , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Comments on draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 23:42:29 -0000 On 28/02/2017 09:34, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Brian E Carpenter < > brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> My concern about the all-in model is that it makes the WG almost >> inaccessible to people who are not accomplished GitHub users. >> I assume that means most people. >> >> > I don't believe that this is true. Do you have some evidence for this from > WGs which have used this model, or is this just a theoretical concern? No, it's a thought experiment. I thought about running the current discussions on rfc2460bis and rfc4291bis this way and concluded that it would be virtually impossible. You've persuaded me that a tight-knit WG can certainly work this way. Brian