From nobody Tue Mar 3 18:06:39 2020 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 998A73A0B71; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:06:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=LzqhE5FC; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=1jPQfCIy 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 S1Q7oD92d0ug; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:06:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AEA33A0B79; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:06:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F5A386; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 21:06:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 03 Mar 2020 21:06:34 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=B CsGKC4iA7IBP9NxGaZRB/Yci8wgWjZprIQaD25h2jo=; b=LzqhE5FC8ar/wTAZF cPqJqttN6N1vhF7citFVPJ1Sw3PKk/vD5zlXmGtFWjSGqAKGNILaTAvD1N/oQCYf S6gUDttYu92BGduUw2irInPsALe/iw+R7ZWLNA4SYi1FbiSB8GAMgC6wtDEzeqNg eYJDqt9GAzjp3/qzipaxmggoQB6TjdA8qFCxkrdPiNUy/AMNl+CBQYWZtdhugnlu uv8vkPHo1GNsBR3pBXTrxC7ov4syU7RwJITiOaaW0BVoroeIzLV5CQilAxjy457b Cji2SkWuM/jJkRU4vQYSnqpORjHCqbJ7bC9q1T0zeeF5OSDFCnJVRVTO4+pFI84i QTQKg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=BCsGKC4iA7IBP9NxGaZRB/Yci8wgWjZprIQaD25h2 jo=; b=1jPQfCIyVwxS/wuob1YBeCBxBSpMSd59g9pFEpd17aLHGfILsHwAgOJTO Wh1vEhoeWjNj/FMeUwAYLRNgCVGGVQr09Q8o7MFYs6Be0TsMnVFCnwv1nNPH/wkx fjO95RkLeDb7hF28XFZakiMzTsNS/LjLWCEYuA7wf1lytn+Ju4qtssvTrygI25q3 lcscvgqvEcAgxLW3gCx+XynSpkNvVBEid//Doneo5w+b3I3SWKXUr5XV7aJfpit7 vCXT7Fziw3ibeBMQaH3koKySgTQ6YfaIdvpMQ+M6c+T3fBxdQv4O8PyMVXP0Ae6i 0FchREzyChMUrRA0vxtEkoMCKfxLA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddtjedggedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtvdenucfhrhhomheptehlihhs shgrucevohhophgvrhcuoegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhnqeenucffohhmrg hinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecukfhppedujeefrdefkedruddujedrjedunecuvehluhhs thgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghlihhsshgrsegtoh hophgvrhifrdhinh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.71]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 579E73280060; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 21:06:33 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 21:06:32 -0500 Cc: Brian E Carpenter , gen-art@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Martin Thomson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 04 Mar 2020 02:06:37 -0000 I put this in an RFC Editor note. Alissa > On Feb 24, 2020, at 11:04 AM, Martin Thomson = wrote: >=20 > Thanks Brian, >=20 > On Sun, Feb 23, 2020, at 17:01, Brian Carpenter via Datatracker wrote: >> Is this draft intended to become part of BCP25? I think it would be >> useful for the IESG to clarify this rather than leave it to the RFC = Editor. >=20 > This is a good question. Given the intended status of BCP, I would = say that integrating into 25 is better than creating a new number. I = don't know how to best signal this intent though. >=20 > And I fixed the nit in the copy on GitHub. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art From nobody Tue Mar 3 18:49:07 2020 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 A30AB3A0C23; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:49:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 aBjVDx7LtVuO; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:49:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pf1-x436.google.com (mail-pf1-x436.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::436]) (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 434D43A0C22; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:49:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf1-x436.google.com with SMTP id l7so178872pff.6; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 18:49:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wZKCLrOn/t2nH9xKpoVt/td8B+pm2/cXwZFWR7/KUWU=; b=StcYgTP9736HTNmwdMLL2/MnImUXedMg+8qH5RtK+/gSoL0yO9smn9TCGdk3lGwWGH 69YnhsXP0KyivBD7hqFf5NtZyBlGVpgNMWjYAXwFNvcFV+OALTyh7wEWqghhRZ+2HUEw ER9C4Qj+X8p/GXr5op4xk011YgvxaRT8zVxpjij8Pow3QwDPPmMtB8C/zqVhNq/P5+Vy 8QyBR/z6lJliFnRiocw/+kX+3uGMh4mCkXhRwwFOuGyE52p1PKRE+h9VFEOCDrSUC77M PflgKCYDjPZry3lVYV81Q8mr64b5Ad3b/om/24mokTe8GI+rOAxRnXK5eXWUtJT8ueG6 ajpA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=wZKCLrOn/t2nH9xKpoVt/td8B+pm2/cXwZFWR7/KUWU=; b=RcxW1ZLl5M/RE/8EaJn8LxKP5iOSlSwYcH5o2YbS99hASyOGb4MpkqPUL56kq6kvbv PFOZ5MOlQ9xiZBWIzBcMwLCnSy8jQZuCGKs97+89wGtciRO9mri42DHCpsPKiexYMZlx gs5uQrehkXH4AJbcBUSnkXptN/+Uh68dLr1laf3BxXYa7/w/ceXchBPkwfoYy8oJ6rGz U3KSfoznS8rMb6jFQ1DeXhDRkvo5WdN05TTNustni0WSwQIiowhL1rW/A6rFYWJWPTzz tfQuWM3R25C7lybymnmAj/pBgqmlrNrnxOnfwUqvTWLm8jUtS//rMmeQf968O30Q9adQ WNbg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ33aip3GW7nT85btvmlv7/k9WPP1aAZwN2LRwAno0FMzBY6028z W5SIwTC5N0ciFk0m+3A0ppu9ZKdE X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvItjN9rl7tw80FAYYLu+4Vt/j40s2YPRVP3av7imlkMXlhJPpO6FszL66SBCCI/0DGyyCXnw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:dc43:: with SMTP id f3mr504030pgj.143.1583290143309; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 18:49:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.25.143]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s12sm3498688pgv.73.2020.03.03.18.49.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Mar 2020 18:49:02 -0800 (PST) To: Alissa Cooper , Martin Thomson Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <690000ac-1c63-640e-0e24-00952982ef90@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 15:48:57 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 04 Mar 2020 02:49:06 -0000 Thanks Brian On 04-Mar-20 15:06, Alissa Cooper wrote: > I put this in an RFC Editor note. > Alissa > >> On Feb 24, 2020, at 11:04 AM, Martin Thomson wrote: >> >> Thanks Brian, >> >> On Sun, Feb 23, 2020, at 17:01, Brian Carpenter via Datatracker wrote: >>> Is this draft intended to become part of BCP25? I think it would be >>> useful for the IESG to clarify this rather than leave it to the RFC Editor. >> >> This is a good question. Given the intended status of BCP, I would say that integrating into 25 is better than creating a new number. I don't know how to best signal this intent though. >> >> And I fixed the nit in the copy on GitHub. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gen-art mailing list >> Gen-art@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art > > From nobody Tue Mar 3 19:20:52 2020 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 36E6B3A0CA9; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 19:20:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=AOjxo8/S; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=CuTDBOyI 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 XxZS9gALVC-o; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 19:20:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FDFA3A0CA7; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 19:20:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41FA022299; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 22:20:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 03 Mar 2020 22:20:34 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=hmZxz9oLi8kztuW5idlmKrmS1M1M ZHqzY9I2q7LGnF8=; b=AOjxo8/SuNYf9lK2rdc6PAd8rawkmh+mZFQoZkq2X3At Du+nTMnZNLUxHU6WNZsXAqJngKJ/wOkRJGJpYUForHd3UJTvZru9rOn65B4Pc8ZH HcWYmrkhWpRe5VGAa11j2SXzqfT74SmQ2oOPv/hN8ZNZSDK3Cu9pxq/jTGjKubei gXnt9vSXlwkULE4wWj9810TGhqJp7/FvF/08prybRpZpFJ2uZ3wHoGdubPn5Trjx LBJZi6QXONquEli7atBoBgQBZuzcXkuJwKgI+2Zqv7UM3tfJOppDfmq5zWqaw6c6 jk9lX9hRdzi8C8pNaohr3kV/CoP40yKI4Re6t2Aiog== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=hmZxz9 oLi8kztuW5idlmKrmS1M1MZHqzY9I2q7LGnF8=; b=CuTDBOyIZLKU6q9oWTbXCv d3jRzJEI1U3NVFZSXTMJdKJo+f8EdW3OZ0l0M1P7gy/PkPVwDMSTbwB6yR5+lcl4 sVwUVTP7HKt1iPOJKLSQdkn7NpmSbaJ/z63KFjIJZNRFA3QU8h6tCHaLTgjoplur iJ26mZdVRz4E7uIxDetXQ6AaxOoLv0IEZTGmy88bczqRsP5A2OY8qWhlXYnbSJuu eAMANCTRPOh1w/WpDv0v4NG21geXI7X1m6WJNcwPnLz4AYCKQ9Xg1KdtorkQQNIR o/PcFJmcbahmniTKE+t+pmEdT/hX6lS13Q9lZtq5CjS3amawbs229UwATOYF6grw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddtjedgheekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgr mhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 9211FE00D7; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 22:20:33 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-986-gfc2d493-fmstable-20200304v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <158293952232.19620.7747617282702610852@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158293952232.19620.7747617282702610852@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2020 14:20:15 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "David Black" , tsv-art@ietf.org Cc: last-call@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Tsvart_last_call_review_of_draft-iet?= =?utf-8?q?f-git-using-github-04?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 04 Mar 2020 03:20:38 -0000 Hi David, Thanks for the review (and apologies for having it slip the net until now). On Sat, Feb 29, 2020, at 12:25, David Black via Datatracker wrote: > [1] The split of Issue Tracker material across Sections 4.1 and 5 seems off. > In particular, Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 on closing and reopening issues are > strongly connected to the Section 5 discussion of WG policies for Issue > Tracker usage and hence ought to be moved into Section 5. The Section > 4.1 discussion on use of labels could likewise benefit from being merged > into the more extensive discussion of WG use of labels in Section 5.4 . This is a hard one. The advice in Section 4 is intended to be generic, whereas Section 5 is intended to narrow this to the point of being specific. That naturally produces duplication, but I'm not seeing anything in Section 4.1 that is not universally applicable. > [2] The example WG policies in Section 5 come tantalizingly close to being > well known policies that can be used by reference in a fashion analogous to > the well-known IANA registry management policies in Section 4.1 of > RFC 5226 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226#section-4.1). Doing the > analogous thing with these GitHub policies is likely to be greatly appreciated > by WG Chairs who are new to WG use of GitHub. However, use of GitHub > may not have matured to the point where this is a sensible thing to do, and > hence I leave the determination of whether this should be done to the > authors' and the IESG's best judgement. The 8126 categories have become more precise over time in a way that has allowed us to use labels, but the need there is more acute. To me, the titles of Section 5.1 and 5.2 might be used with a fair degree of confidence in their meaning, but Section 5.3 is still a more nebulous. My sense is that these will ultimately be the labels that end up being used, but their definitions are still quite loose. Letting this tighten up as we get more experience seems like a good thing to work toward, but less from the need for a formalism and more from the perspective of making work practices more widely accessible. If we need to formally identify these things (say, in a charter), then that should work without saying "use Mode X from Section 5.Y of RFC ZZZZ". However, now we haven't formalized work modes to that extent so far. I am not certain if doing that would be a good idea. From nobody Tue Mar 3 19:31:04 2020 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 3EDE43A0CCC; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 19:31:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.119.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Message-ID: <158329266217.7881.4336530670708559605@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 19:31:02 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] I-D Action: draft-ietf-git-using-github-05.txt X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 04 Mar 2020 03:31:03 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the GitHub Integration and Tooling WG of the IETF. Title : Working Group GitHub Usage Guidance Authors : Martin Thomson Barbara Stark Filename : draft-ietf-git-using-github-05.txt Pages : 22 Date : 2020-03-03 Abstract: This document describes best practices for Working Groups that use GitHub for their work. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Fri Mar 6 08:32:05 2020 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 93ADB3A0A5E; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 08:32:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oJpue14bqFjL; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 08:32:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 BEC453A0A5D; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 08:32:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 026GVwJF008664; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:31:58 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 6081120441A; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:31:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F986204396; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:31:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 026GVwbs012940; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:31:58 +0100 To: last-call@ietf.org Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:31:58 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 06 Mar 2020 16:32:04 -0000 Hi, I take advantage of this Last Call about github use at IETF to give my comments about writing I-Ds on github. We are writing a draft with a few colleagues at IETF about a 6MAN topic. We initially thought we'd use the Word template but quickly we moved to xml2rfc and github storage. - the xml2rfc.ietf.org GUI generates a *.txt.pdf file, whereas it should generate a *.pdf file. That makes difficult to talk about a 'txt' file (is it the ASCII or the .txt.pdf?). I have been told I should report this to 'tools-discuss' email list, which I will do one day. - the github folder containing the xml source should be as small as possible, and have at least as possible additional clutter files. This is not like a project of C files where there are no numerous *.c and *.h and *.asm files. There is just one source: the xml. - I wrote a README about how to use that xml file. There are to distinct operations: compilation and submission. - despite my efforts of explaining, people still prefer to exchange the files by email. This feedback is from working with several groups on several xml drafts on several gihub repositories. - this the README that I wrote and put in the github repository of the xml file of the Internet Draft we currently write: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0. on Windows, use the free Github Desktop tool. Within it, use buttons like 'Commit to master' and others like 'Push origin' in order to upload the files that you modify. 1. How to 'compile' the .xml file: - go to https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org - press the button to select a file - choose the .xml file - leave the 'Output format' and 'Options' to their default - click 'Submit' That displays the .txt file in the browser, but can also create .txt and .pdf files, depending on how the Output format is Optioned. That does not submit the draft to the IETF. 2. In order to submit a draft, upload the .xml at the address https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/ 3. do not commit the xml file to github before you are sure it compiles safely on xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org Alex Le 24/02/2020 à 02:01, Brian Carpenter via Datatracker a écrit : > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter > Review result: Ready with Issues > > Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > . > > Document: draft-ietf-git-using-github-04.txt > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter > Review Date: 2020-02-24 > IETF LC End Date: 2020-03-03 > IESG Telechat date: > > Summary: Ready with issue > -------- > > Comment: > -------- > > I've tracked this document since the -00 version and I think it is clear > and represents WG consensus. > > Issues: > ------- > > Is this draft intended to become part of BCP25? I think it would be > useful for the IESG to clarify this rather than leave it to the RFC Editor. > > Nit: > ---- > >> 3.4. Document Formats >> >> In addition to the canonical XML format [RFC7991], document editors >> might choose to use a different input form for editing documents, >> such as Markdown. Markdown-based formats are more accessible for new >> contributors, though ultimately decisions about format is left to >> document editors. > > s/is/are/ > > From nobody Fri Mar 6 18:15:12 2020 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 894DA3A100F; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 18:15:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Brian Carpenter via Datatracker To: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.119.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <158354730539.2291.8166108343540248932@ietfa.amsl.com> Reply-To: Brian Carpenter Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 18:15:05 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Sat, 07 Mar 2020 02:15:06 -0000 Reviewer: Brian Carpenter Review result: Ready Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at . Document: draft-ietf-git-using-github-05.txt Reviewer: Brian Carpenter Review Date: 2020-03-07 IETF LC End Date: 2020-03-03 IESG Telechat date: 2020-03-12 Summary: Ready -------- Comments: --------- Thanks for dealing with my Last Call comments. From nobody Sun Mar 8 21:08:36 2020 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 292B83A1030 for ; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 21:08:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=TAxU+TIC; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=K9F59uAO 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 GQJgX9NOHVEz for ; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 21:08:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0017F3A102E for ; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 21:08:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090876B8; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 00:08:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 09 Mar 2020 00:08:32 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=puPFgJBg+boGVejWhPKfVxLITGcp NMeElPc4llXHpYA=; b=TAxU+TICvN5ozUlDOQIHIZT9pLj+ZMCigBr1jyD3p0bk Zo94qcTMTo9TIggWvuB4bs11+7jSG+lhEWPFO8/6Vpsi0P5PkO+a2GRMSgoLIxNz HLvHhvA1zq6JNvBuzPcHeDOKRrIDAjqCFB8GUAxU9pz6isyTXOaZUH8OqV/EduZB sfq2x5e4UzfUW17zDvHRbusDH4IKqHLn/4GyzG9DX6MKzv5Unc3SfngEec4V/F6X BO8y8+1lbtckYAGGdvPUo8OE3uoPbXnZYqjcQcsDNuFHse0QiI3R857TVI/WgwZs Ew7DjYeHEOuQOrDxlgwSVKXudbnKYkBx2gLKrVpyZA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=puPFgJ Bg+boGVejWhPKfVxLITGcpNMeElPc4llXHpYA=; b=K9F59uAOugw6nkrDpJ8eZ+ YU9+MfP+UnD6yaVKG/dNxbzGz2WCWVevL3lqzuSp762BNiI/0KGeNncUzbeqXVea WITgy65XJhjSg/+w8lWpaJ4bntlXcwuuM/G/+sSqGc1Gi4e6wnGrZ20ILAOnWbo7 qvCfFzyAk/Jb0dAn71TEkk60MoJTDOCW1/N4oAfYSV19opjr3+tF2EmkKjLxsnwz 3qs58o90NWGI0weaYioyYLfZrrMZpa2kuC6Vy+yzzR3/6vXWz+MBmzqq8YZlGvdp attDhFOmDKejurO8j3moilcH5s8yYsdx7aacbQwUx8liT5ppHT6OSB0CourIQ9ig == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddujedgieekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgr mhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2E31BE00C2; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 00:08:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2020 15:08:10 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Alexandre Petrescu" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?=5BLast-Call=5D_Genart_last_call_rev?= =?utf-8?q?iew_of_draft-ietf-git-using-github-04?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 09 Mar 2020 04:08:34 -0000 On Sat, Mar 7, 2020, at 03:31, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: > I take advantage of this Last Call about github use at IETF to give my > comments about writing I-Ds on github. Hi Alex, Thanks for sharing your experience. Taking this back to the Working Group list as it doesn't seem to be a comment about the work. Do you think that anything in this invalidates the advice and procedures in the draft? Or suggests the need for additions? I didn't see anything that suggests the need for changes. Indeed, your process would seem to fit within the pattern described, with the possible exception of missing a notice for contributors about their obligations (usually CONTRIBUTING.md). > 3. do not commit the xml file to github before you are sure it > compiles safely on xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org I personally wouldn't make this recommendation. Stuff breaks occasionally and asking people to check is unreliable. Automated validation on check-in is my preferred solution to this problem. Cheers, Martin From nobody Sun Mar 8 23:44:53 2020 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 BD5113A0474; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 23:44:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Barry Leiba Message-ID: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2020 23:44:47 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 09 Mar 2020 06:44:49 -0000 Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I have a really simple thing to discuss before I move to a “yes” ballot: — Section 4.1.3 — Chairs need to assess whether the arguments offered represent new information or not. This can require some discussion to determine accurately. Resolved issues MUST remain closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue. There seems to be an inconsistency here: WGCs decide whether new information has been given, so it would seem that it’s the WGCs who decide that an issue should be reopened. But then we say there has to be consensus for it. In addition to that appearing inconsistent, I’m not clear how one would determine whether there’s rough consensus to reopen an issue, if doing so were controversial. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Idle question: Would it make sense for this document to formally update 2418? — Section 1.2 — GitHub is freely accessible on the open Internet, albeit currently only via IPv4. Why mention v4 only? Does such mention have archival value once github supports v6? GitHub provides a simplified and integrated interface to not only git, but also provides basic user management, an issue tracker, This doesn’t really work as written; I suggest this: NEW GitHub provides a simplified and integrated interface to git, and also provides basic user management, an issue tracker, END along with other improvements that come from broader participation by facilitating those in the community to participate. Participation/participate feels odd. Maybe, “along with other improvements that come from facilitating participation by a broader community.” ? — Section 1.5 — Please use the boilerplate directly from 8174: it was debated and worded as it is intentionally. (That said, this is not a blocking comment.) — Section 3 — Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for anything more than managing drafts. I’m not objecting to this, but... why? If the WGCs may decide to use github for drafts without involving the ADs, why can’t they also decide to use it for charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs? — Section 4.2 — Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request changes to a repository. There’s a number agreement issue here (“feature” and “allow”). I would fix this by making it all singular, so the sentence doesn’t sound strange: NEW A pull request is a GitHub feature that allows a user to request a change to a repository. END — Section 4.2.1 — In addition to the features that pull requests share with issues, users can also review the changes in a pull request. This is a valuable feature, but it has some issues. You use “issues” here in two different senses; I suggest reserving the word for referring to github “issues”, and using a different word for “but it has some issues.” Maybe, “but it presents some challenges.” — Section 5.3.1 — Finally, process checkpoints like Working Group Last Call (WGLC; Section 7.4 of [RFC2418]) provides additional safeguards Number agreement: “Finally, process checkpoints, such as Working Group Last Call (WGLC; Section 7.4 of [RFC2418]), provide additional safeguards”. — Section 6 — During the development of a document, individual revisions of a document can be built and formally submitted as an Internet-Draft. Nit: two indefinite articles feels odd; I would make it, “individual revisions of the document”. From nobody Mon Mar 9 02:06:03 2020 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 CCEF13A0AC9 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 02:06:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AAA5wTQ0hSy2 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 02:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 312773A0AC7 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 02:05:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02995uOA013952; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 10:05:56 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id B1039204317; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 10:05:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A165E20166C; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 10:05:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02995tLZ028637; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 10:05:55 +0100 To: Martin Thomson Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 10:05:56 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 09 Mar 2020 09:06:02 -0000 Hi, Thank you for the message. Le 09/03/2020 à 05:08, Martin Thomson a écrit : > On Sat, Mar 7, 2020, at 03:31, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> I take advantage of this Last Call about github use at IETF to give >> my comments about writing I-Ds on github. > > Hi Alex, > > Thanks for sharing your experience. Taking this back to the Working > Group list as it doesn't seem to be a comment about the work. Indeed I didnt read the draft prior to submitting the comments. > Do you think that anything in this invalidates the advice and > procedures in the draft? Or suggests the need for additions? I > didn't see anything that suggests the need for changes. I now read the draft. I have the following comments: draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: > The Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining if there is > interest in using GitHub and making a consensus call to determine if > the proposed policy and use is acceptable. I agree with the suggestion. But I would like to mention, for the sake of not missing it, that in my experience it is not the WG Chairs who request the use of GitHub for documents, but it is the potential authors that might decide so. They feel a need to share and contribute to a common document, and select github as a place to store the intermediary verrsions. But I agree that it might be that in other WGs where I am not active it is the WG Chairs who request it. > 3.1. What to Use GitHub For This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to me to say What to Use GitHub For. This is what it should be used for: share Internet Drafts and share code implementing protocols. > 4.2. Pull Requests > > Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request > changes to a repository. It might be a matter of English usage, but I think Pull Requests allow users to 'obtain' the most recent changes present in the repository(?) If I understand github correctly, in order to 'request changes to a repository' one might rather use 'push' instead of 'pull'(?) (the button in GUI on Windows that obtains the most recent changes present in the repository is labelled 'Pull origin'; after pressing it, and success, the GUI says 'Last fetched just now'). > 1.2. GitHub In this introductory section, I think it makes sense to explain the behaviour of GitHub with respect to accents in people names. Is it working ok or not? For my part, I suspect gihub to be the origin of errors I am struggling with the following accents in these names: Ole Trøan, 神明達哉 (TATUYA Jinmei), Jérôme Härri. They display perfectly fine in my emails on Windows with Thunderbird, but get messed when putting in an xml file on Windows, gnu emacs, xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org and github. I suspect github to be the problem. I would like to know whether other people using Windows, xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org and GitHub can put safely these names in an xml file. If we find out that github does not mess these accents then it would be great to tell so in the I-D. You said: > Indeed, your process would seem to fit within the pattern described, > with the possible exception of missing a notice for contributors > about their obligations (usually CONTRIBUTING.md). Sounds reasonable. > >> 3. do not commit the xml file to github before you are sure it >> compiles safely on xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org > > I personally wouldn't make this recommendation. Stuff breaks > occasionally and asking people to check is unreliable. Automated > validation on check-in is my preferred solution to this problem. Makes sense. How about the other recommendation? I suggest recommending this: do not keep the .txt nor the .pdf in the root folder. Alex > > Cheers, Martin > From nobody Mon Mar 9 05:32:59 2020 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 B02D13A0E61; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 05:32:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke_via_Datatracker?= To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke?= Message-ID: <158375717247.13802.5791535930258630810@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2020 05:32:52 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_Abstain_on_draf?= =?utf-8?q?t-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 09 Mar 2020 12:32:53 -0000 Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: Abstain When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I abstain with the meaning of "I oppose this document but understand that others differ and am not going to stand in the way of the others." per https://www.ietf.org/standards/process/iesg-ballots/ Is there a reason why "GitHub" is used rather than simply "Git" ? Is it implicit to be the commercial web site "github.com" ? If so, let's be clear in this first document from the GIT WG. Alternatives such as GitLab and BitBucket are only briefly mentioned. And, I understand that the GIT charter is also quite vague on this topic and SHOULD be updated to make it clear if this document is not clear about what is "GitHub". The document itself is clear, easy to read, and sensible except for the unique perceived focus of "github.com". Finally, I cannot accept that an IETF document in 2020 proposes to use an IPv4-only web site (see also the IAB statement https://www.iab.org/2016/11/07/iab-statement-on-ipv6 ). Let's eat our own dog food. -éric From nobody Mon Mar 9 22:33:09 2020 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 A578E3A0879; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 22:32:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=P7TIecFn; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=MW0cl63f 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 hmaU2fqrUPSu; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 22:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 705073A0870; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 22:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 599D1853; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 01:32:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 01:32:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=OF 9GAe0u5x0gw1D+CowN/iwaLkia9oOpw/vzgJ1R0NA=; b=P7TIecFn/iT+hWubwx tH9kEHxJlMPXjUXIXH0gZwf4pxCWeDn3RGp72MMlDraLnqSOI/mx647sVzXKMhlS +Vz0fv0kf4Xuc3hjCygXIgV5gz1pR+QbnyAI+zAX0nAEPbrrmMgDYO1n8VbfG+EF 1yFY2EjORX1TDdtrCU4tqmmxGFcAQkG1zxq5ZfFPlJZ9ytswODFbCM83mMAykjSS jh+76Ftbzkp4jV0LeN2097aTbH4jWrh7Ge012JQ1Y3UGn/SBrP40r3qJoCRllzuy 2m6c2uJUzHlcS1juztNe7mJcFJFaOsq4oDzXsy8Ja8WDh1V9ihTCbB4MwZNT79Sj y0Fg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=OF9GAe0u5x0gw1D+CowN/iwaLkia9oOpw/vzgJ1R0 NA=; b=MW0cl63fAm8wgghQVEcvfatmFnFGTY4lkHBYEa7Y0Qe9FzIxYu7cYbA6i 4XHFh+OomsPfw+605Z1lD8Txk0dVxLztbdz4M1w3IWr/dwmvPMADke7tHMTaQdWM V5Qzjy3TLY7g3lB4X34o8Wo6X8S8HR3HxcrnYHSWuIN8/WArSxJKUGr6uiCGI2Zq Ylk14W9Q4eTX/BitzftJMN7djeTo6qU9fJqTsqd33KJsirhHYN0WBOP0EISRj4Xk wH8NcFVhppuyJXO9zavTjO5+7M/qbsm6knwmUHAlnYzeW89iu71Ol+6Kjc0EtqO+ OC+9LRDgQ2bImQHytybETn9mH1T/w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudduledgkeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfr rghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3C217E00AC; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 01:32:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:32:32 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Barry Leiba" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Barry_Leiba=27s_Discuss_on_draft-iet?= =?utf-8?q?f-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 05:32:57 -0000 Hi Barry, Thanks for reviewing. Your PR is https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-gi= thub/pull/43 Working group, please take a look at some of these changes; I think that= they are consistent with the existing intent, but they are substantive = changes. I've added *** in this email for those who want to see just th= e proposed new text. On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 17:44, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote: > Chairs need to assess whether the > arguments offered represent new information or not. This can requi= re > some discussion to determine accurately. Resolved issues MUST remai= n > closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue. >=20 > There seems to be an inconsistency here: WGCs decide whether new infor= mation > has been given, so it would seem that it=E2=80=99s the WGCs who decide= that an issue > should be reopened. But then we say there has to be consensus for it.= In > addition to that appearing inconsistent, I=E2=80=99m not clear how one= would determine > whether there=E2=80=99s rough consensus to reopen an issue, if doing s= o were > controversial. The lens of fresh perspective is wonderful. I totally see your concern = now. That said, I think that this is good advice still, because it creates a = status quo bias in a good way: resolved issues stay resolved unless the = WG reaches consensus that there is a need for a change. For a contentio= us issue, it might be that there is no desire to relitigate the subject = and then nothing My original intent here was to advise against relitigation of difficult = issues. It is often the case that Working Groups revisit decisions over= time, but using an issue tracker creates an artifact that allows us to = say "no, we decided X" and therefore avoid having the same debate over a= nd over. For reference, that text is: > Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consensus= MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented. The last sentence here is just a (bad) repetition of the introductory se= ntence of the section. I want to remove that, but then beef this up a l= ittle. ********* > For long-running work items, new contributors often raise issues that = have already been resolved. Determining whether an issue requires re-eva= luation might require some discussion in the Working Group. Where there = was rough consensus regarding the resolution of a contentious issue, there could b= e a temptation to restart a debate. > > Chairs are empowered to exercise discretion in determining whether to = reopen issues. For more difficult matters, the chairs MAY insist that t= he Working Group reach consensus on whether new an issue should be reope= ned. Note however that any product of this process still needs to have = the support of rough consensus in the Working Group, which could justify= reopening issues. The crux of this is that we do empower chairs to guide debate and dictat= e process (see Section 6.1 of BCP 25). The advice about consensus to re= open remains, but at a lesser strength (it's advice). And then there is= a reminder that failure to address a real problem can lead to failure o= f the overall process; if you fail to address a problem, maybe WGLC fail= s. > Idle question: Would it make sense for this document to formally updat= e 2418? The current plan is to add this to BCP 25; there should be a note to the= editor to that effect. I think that is the right way to do this. Noth= ing in here *changes* 2418. But it does add to it. > Why mention v4 only? Does such mention have archival value once githu= b > supports v6? Because people apparently love that subject. I will remove the albeit. > Please use the boilerplate directly from 8174: it was debated and word= ed as it > is intentionally. (That said, this is not a blocking comment.) Hah, I thought that I had managed to remove that variant from all of my = drafts :) And no one else complained... > Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub fo= r > anything more than managing drafts. >=20 > I=E2=80=99m not objecting to this, but... why? If the WGCs may decide= to use github > for drafts without involving the ADs, why can=E2=80=99t they also deci= de to use it for > charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs? You know, I think that is how it has always been. I think that if we're= going to the trouble of publishing an RFC on this topic, it's probably = OK to soften it. I'm going to propose two changes: SHOULD, and limiting= this to the most extreme modes: ************ > Chairs SHOULD involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub, es= pecially where substantive discussion of issues is permitted as describe= d in {{mode-discuss}}. Where that reference is to the section entitled "Issue Discussion Mode". From nobody Mon Mar 9 22:50:55 2020 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 1D52B3A0763 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 22:50:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=o3EHr/Bx; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=tR4Pw3SA 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 su1-T3OQP8CP for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 22:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BF623A0762 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 22:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2543857; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 01:50:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 01:50:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=QOhgai4oETpsjD0ejUS4vhu/mbzk MKv/OFCYpbj4NVA=; b=o3EHr/BxcZ9/YqjROrveGWiSQjZ3usFuDyKuoEYO+p0u nRauieY0T9IW3Z09iCl3ihMcJ/bJXWaxaRvW0iw9hfH+/7t6oZo68WZurRuhsGts KT+skDcfk0B8QOW0gdwagiHg1UqW9nMaVujdE5vQxkdQLR/fz9Dwhucr0NUSRqKK caoWye4a6+4Jz2+sHsQpBj6naK9q3eJTRELVC3zN+THfcvFpA9bWCZgm0jCnMgjI 0nosSOF9x4BmXudCstfSCAYzFQ2P0IK/XxrRE/aKtd14nH0z8hDN3ombibP6G3Oy 3ziypv73N4KSDMQUm8MmKZjCJE1xS6TPHa0scoGuZg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=QOhgai 4oETpsjD0ejUS4vhu/mbzkMKv/OFCYpbj4NVA=; b=tR4Pw3SA3IBYwi30pHtSUw YrGfPS26WZBiufAI1+k2/Qxiv0ysFm4U46LKNXVGLuwC1nCfSrspOh/VPhq2jozZ YlxwNOo13yJdxnQxiTAKd3KpeWNv4G2iSp2DrsmTys0lze+qVKMUJsjwBPaDQMnc zKswwlaEmx7Gp8OPM8l4VxZQ+Kj8V3hrzP1QR/HhVUxOOhmz2drwPQN+gI9tChY1 MGtFimszDtCfKKXZvcr4RXYUsBg2ysqsHFytDFcvYhWZg4wyKM90Mq9fnVSw2ZZr vu8CM0TOKIl9RFxudevY7uyRS7Xo2tenWOoq76uf4Vd+XgcdFBEyYB6+jTVIE9Vg == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudduledgkeekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuve hluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 07A69E00AC; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 01:50:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:50:29 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Alexandre Petrescu" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?=5BLast-Call=5D_Genart_last_call_rev?= =?utf-8?q?iew_of_draft-ietf-git-using-github-04?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 05:50:53 -0000 On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 20:05, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: > But I would like to mention, for the sake of not missing it, that > in my experience it is not the WG Chairs who request the use of GitHub > for documents, but it is the potential authors that might decide so. > They feel a need to share and contribute to a common document, and > select github as a place to store the intermediary verrsions. This was always possible and remains so. This document exists to describe how formal functions, like decision-making, might best use the tool. More specific text on that is in Section 3.1. > > 3.1. What to Use GitHub For > > This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to me to say What > to Use GitHub For. This is what it should be used for: share Internet > Drafts and share code implementing protocols. That is in the Introduction and Document Goals sections, which I think is sufficient. > > 4.2. Pull Requests > > > > Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request > > changes to a repository. > > It might be a matter of English usage, but I think Pull Requests allow > users to 'obtain' the most recent changes present in the repository(?) > If I understand github correctly, in order to 'request changes to a > repository' one might rather use 'push' instead of 'pull'(?) "pull request" is the correct term. It is a request for someone else to "pull" certain changes into their repository. It's not a push. That would imply no choice on the part of the target. And yes, it's weird that you push to a branch in order to create a pull request. But that's how git works: it makes a degree of sense, but only if your world view is sufficiently distorted to begin with. > In this introductory section, I think it makes sense to explain the > behaviour of GitHub with respect to accents in people names. Is it > working ok or not? Yes. The whole charset thing is difficult, but if you use UTF-8 and Unicode you will find that things just work. In most cases, you don't even have to make an effort to do so because modern software has largely left the baggage of the past behind. We've recently added the real names of contributors to the QUIC specs and it just worked. > If we find out that github does not mess these accents then it would be > great to tell so in the I-D. I would rather leave that pass without comment. From my perspective, this all works. That might be cause to celebrate, but we don't need to burden people with the details of solved problems when there are enough unsolved ones left to worry about. If you are having issues, then that's something to work on. For instance, it could be a system locale issue. > How about the other recommendation? > I suggest recommending this: do not keep the .txt nor the .pdf in the > root folder. That is a fine suggestion that I fully support. I find that including build output in the repository contributes to a hostile process for contributors. I have other things that I would rather spend that budget on, like trailing whitespace... But none of that really needs to be in an RFC. It's just minutiae. From nobody Mon Mar 9 23:05:35 2020 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 C863A3A0877; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 23:05:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 E9nWujB_CSsf; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 23:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-out02.uio.no (mail-out02.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:8210::71]) (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 7468D3A07ED; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 23:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-mx12.uio.no ([129.240.10.84]) by mail-out02.uio.no with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93.0.4) (envelope-from ) id 1jBY11-000DEm-LY; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:05:19 +0100 Received: from login-osl2.i.bitbit.net ([87.238.42.61] helo=ranger.ms.redpill-linpro.com) by mail-mx12.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) user kjetilho (Exim 4.93.0.4) (envelope-from ) id 1jBY0z-000AFe-VI; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:05:19 +0100 Message-ID: <68bda8ec830a149be968181d5a10df8881116004.camel@ifi.uio.no> From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme To: Alexandre Petrescu , last-call@ietf.org Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:05:15 +0100 In-Reply-To: <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.5 (3.32.5-1.fc30) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: neutral (mail-mx12.uio.no: 87.238.42.61 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ifi.uio.no) client-ip=87.238.42.61; envelope-from=kjetilho@ifi.uio.no; helo=ranger.ms.redpill-linpro.com; X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO) X-UiO-Scanned: 0C7723166D87E540C2E17763F059EE795F028B5A Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 06:05:26 -0000 On Fri, 2020-03-06 at 17:31 +0100, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: > - I wrote a README about how to use that xml file. There are two > distinct operations: compilation and submission. > > - this the README that I wrote and put in the github repository of > the xml file of the Internet Draft we currently write: > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > 0. on Windows, use the free Github Desktop tool. Within it, use > buttons like 'Commit to master' and others like 'Push origin' in > order to upload the files that you modify. > > 1. How to 'compile' the .xml file: > > - go to https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org > - press the button to select a file > - choose the .xml file > - leave the 'Output format' and 'Options' to their default > - click 'Submit' > > That displays the .txt file in the browser, but can also create .txt > and .pdf files, depending on how the Output format is Optioned. this should be handled automatically by Github Actions (I am not that familiar with Github Actions, but it is trivial to set up with Gitlab CI and I don't think Github is much worse.) the draft mentions this in section 8 about Continuous Integration. > That does not submit the draft to the IETF. > > 2. In order to submit a draft, upload the .xml at the address > https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/ this could also be done automatically, possibly restricted to happen only for merges into specific git branches, if you adopt a "git flow" work method (the draft hints at using something like that, since it discourages direct commits to "master") > 3. do not commit the xml file to github before you are sure it > compiles safely on xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org again, this sanity check is best left to computers. > - despite my efforts of explaining, people still prefer to exchange > the files by email. This feedback is from working with several > groups on several xml drafts on several github repositories. both Github and Gitlab have good web based editors which can recommended to Git skeptics (there is no doubt that Git can be intimidating to get started with, and for some contributors it may not be worthwhile). I have not tried them on an XML formatted draft, however. the draft stresses that a WG's choice of using a git service should not exclude participants who will not use the service. the draft does not go into reasons for such a rejection, but, e.g., the Github EULA is not necessarily acceptable to everyone, and this should be respected. -- regards, Kjetil T. From nobody Tue Mar 10 03:24:42 2020 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 E35443A0FF5 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:24:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.668 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3BljUpvBCM9S for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:24:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 3D1123A0FF3 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:24:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AAOa03022909; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:36 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id B3E15201F0B; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A60E5200C9E; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AAOaws004724; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:36 +0100 To: Martin Thomson Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <4499a1bb-eb83-1eac-5e69-e46f6df3f332@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:36 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 10:24:41 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 06:50, Martin Thomson a écrit : > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 20:05, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> But I would like to mention, for the sake of not missing it, that >> in my experience it is not the WG Chairs who request the use of >> GitHub for documents, but it is the potential authors that might >> decide so. They feel a need to share and contribute to a common >> document, and select github as a place to store the intermediary >> verrsions. > > This was always possible and remains so. This document exists to > describe how formal functions, like decision-making, might best use > the tool. More specific text on that is in Section 3.1. > >>> 3.1. What to Use GitHub For >> >> This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to me to say >> What to Use GitHub For. This is what it should be used for: share >> Internet Drafts and share code implementing protocols. > > That is in the Introduction and Document Goals sections, which I > think is sufficient. > >>> 4.2. Pull Requests >>> >>> Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request >>> changes to a repository. >> >> It might be a matter of English usage, but I think Pull Requests >> allow users to 'obtain' the most recent changes present in the >> repository(?) If I understand github correctly, in order to >> 'request changes to a repository' one might rather use 'push' >> instead of 'pull'(?) > > "pull request" is the correct term. It is a request for someone else > to "pull" certain changes into their repository. In that case, it would be better to say NEW: > Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request > to obtain the changes made to a repository. instead of OLD: > Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request > changes to a repository. This latter sounds as if a user might request to make changes to a repository. (not to obtain the changes already present). > > It's not a push. That would imply no choice on the part of the > target. > > And yes, it's weird that you push to a branch in order to create a > pull request. But that's how git works: it makes a degree of sense, > but only if your world view is sufficiently distorted to begin with. > >> In this introductory section, I think it makes sense to explain >> the behaviour of GitHub with respect to accents in people names. >> Is it working ok or not? > > Yes. The whole charset thing is difficult, but if you use UTF-8 and > Unicode you will find that things just work. I heard this theory. I try what I said I tried. It does not work. I suspsect it is github. One can isnsit siwht this utf-8 word and I can insist with my is not working. But I will not even try again. I have already tried in the past at IETF with a similar thing: the WiFi access and some WiFi driver. I was told by the majority I was wrong. I was not wrong. But it was not me who proved it - somehow the software got corrected without me insisting. It was a completely other non-IETF advancement. > In most cases, you > don't even have to make an effort to do so because modern software > has largely left the baggage of the past behind. We've recently > added the real names of contributors to the QUIC specs and it just > worked. Was it with Windows 10? Were these the names I said? > >> If we find out that github does not mess these accents then it >> would be great to tell so in the I-D. > > I would rather leave that pass without comment. From my perspective, > this all works. That might be cause to celebrate, but we don't need > to burden people with the details of solved problems when there are > enough unsolved ones left to worry about. If you are having issues, > then that's something to work on. For instance, it could be a system > locale issue. I sigh: I expire air loudly, I shake head negatively. I give up in deception. > >> How about the other recommendation? I suggest recommending this: do >> not keep the .txt nor the .pdf in the root folder. > > That is a fine suggestion that I fully support. I find that > including build output in the repository contributes to a hostile > process for contributors. I have other things that I would rather > spend that budget on, like trailing whitespace... > > But none of that really needs to be in an RFC. It's just minutiae. minutiæ ? Alex > From nobody Tue Mar 10 03:29:35 2020 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 A58283A1001; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:29:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i1gptozqeg3Z; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:29:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.148]) (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 2B49C3A0FEF; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:29:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AATSQP040201; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:29:28 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 905C42047D3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:29:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E62D200C9E; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:29:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AATSHe008148; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:29:28 +0100 To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme , last-call@ietf.org Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <68bda8ec830a149be968181d5a10df8881116004.camel@ifi.uio.no> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <76525d93-313e-da68-9670-f26a39e532ad@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:29:28 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <68bda8ec830a149be968181d5a10df8881116004.camel@ifi.uio.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 10:29:34 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 07:05, Kjetil Torgrim Homme a écrit : > On Fri, 2020-03-06 at 17:31 +0100, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> - I wrote a README about how to use that xml file. There are two >> distinct operations: compilation and submission. >> >> - this the README that I wrote and put in the github repository of >> the xml file of the Internet Draft we currently write: >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> 0. on Windows, use the free Github Desktop tool. Within it, use >> buttons like 'Commit to master' and others like 'Push origin' in >> order to upload the files that you modify. >> >> 1. How to 'compile' the .xml file: >> >> - go to https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org >> - press the button to select a file >> - choose the .xml file >> - leave the 'Output format' and 'Options' to their default >> - click 'Submit' >> >> That displays the .txt file in the browser, but can also create .txt >> and .pdf files, depending on how the Output format is Optioned. > > this should be handled automatically by Github Actions (I am not that > familiar with Github Actions, but it is trivial to set up with Gitlab > CI and I don't think Github is much worse.) the draft mentions this in > section 8 about Continuous Integration. > >> That does not submit the draft to the IETF. >> >> 2. In order to submit a draft, upload the .xml at the address >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/ > > this could also be done automatically, possibly restricted to happen > only for merges into specific git branches, if you adopt a "git flow" > work method (the draft hints at using something like that, since it > discourages direct commits to "master") > >> 3. do not commit the xml file to github before you are sure it >> compiles safely on xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org > > again, this sanity check is best left to computers. > >> - despite my efforts of explaining, people still prefer to exchange >> the files by email. This feedback is from working with several >> groups on several xml drafts on several github repositories. > > both Github and Gitlab have good web based editors which can > recommended to Git skeptics I heard that skepticism from many people in a hurry. They dont have time to get imposed some rule. It is difficult to understand some parts of the github behaviours. Especially by those who do shared document processing by using other document sharing tools like github. This is the gist of it: having a beautiful modern web interface, makes one think that GitHub easily supports things like uploading a document. It is not the case. There is no button on the web to Upload a file. Not even to Download a file. Alex (there is no doubt that Git can be > intimidating to get started with, and for some contributors it may not > be worthwhile). I have not tried them on an XML formatted draft, > however. > > the draft stresses that a WG's choice of using a git service should not > exclude participants who will not use the service. the draft does not > go into reasons for such a rejection, but, e.g., the Github EULA is not > necessarily acceptable to everyone, and this should be respected. > From nobody Tue Mar 10 03:30:45 2020 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 84A363A101E; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:30:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind_via_Datatracker?= To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind?= Message-ID: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:30:37 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_an?= =?utf-8?q?d_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 10:30:39 -0000 Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To be honest I don't fully understand the point of this document. It seem like this document is supposed to be the basis for more discussion, however, I thought that's what we have the wg for. So when and how do we come to a final decision if we want to implement the proposed changes? And what would we do in that case - take this document and republish? Why can't we make the decision first and then publish something? In short, I think it would be important that the document also describes what the next steps are and the triggers to move on! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Other questions/comments: 1) Sec 2.3: "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personnel changes." Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this sentence really unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or GitHub) and what is should do? 2) Sec 2.5: "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" This section indicated that also individual drafts could be maintained within the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or desirable: Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which not? There can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. 3) Also sec 2.5: " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of an ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new repository within that organization for a single document." For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit it to the datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does not seems too useful... 4) Sec 2.6: "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you can add link to external pages? From nobody Tue Mar 10 03:47:41 2020 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 158203A0B88; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:47:36 -0700 (PDT) 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, 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 xhpGacCS9_9F; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:47:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-out01.uio.no (mail-out01.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:10::50]) (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 71CAD3A0B94; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 03:47:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-mx11.uio.no ([129.240.10.83]) by mail-out01.uio.no with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93.0.4) (envelope-from ) id 1jBcQ1-0005i4-Kq; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:25 +0100 Received: from login-osl2.i.bitbit.net ([87.238.42.61] helo=ranger.ms.redpill-linpro.com) by mail-mx11.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) user kjetilho (Exim 4.93.0.4) (envelope-from ) id 1jBcQ0-000GQJ-Vn; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:25 +0100 Message-ID: From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme To: Alexandre Petrescu , last-call@ietf.org Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <76525d93-313e-da68-9670-f26a39e532ad@gmail.com> References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <68bda8ec830a149be968181d5a10df8881116004.camel@ifi.uio.no> <76525d93-313e-da68-9670-f26a39e532ad@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.5 (3.32.5-1.fc30) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: neutral (mail-mx11.uio.no: 87.238.42.61 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ifi.uio.no) client-ip=87.238.42.61; envelope-from=kjetilho@ifi.uio.no; helo=ranger.ms.redpill-linpro.com; X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO) X-UiO-Scanned: 870691026939C44B5AF783653131EBAF77AF749C Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 10:47:36 -0000 On Tue, 2020-03-10 at 11:29 +0100, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: > Le 10/03/2020 à 07:05, Kjetil Torgrim Homme a écrit : > > - despite my efforts of explaining, people still prefer to > > > exchange > > > the files by email. This feedback is from working with several > > > groups on several xml drafts on several github repositories. > > > > both Github and Gitlab have good web based editors which can > > recommended to Git skeptics > > I heard that skepticism from many people in a hurry. They dont have > time to get imposed some rule. > > It is difficult to understand some parts of the github behaviours. > > Especially by those who do shared document processing by using other > document sharing tools like github. > > This is the gist of it: having a beautiful modern web interface, > makes one think that GitHub easily supports things like uploading a > document. It is not the case. There is no button on the web to > Upload a file. it is right up there in the file browser in Github, [Create new file] [Upload files] [Find File] in Gitlab there is a generic [+ v] dropdown menu to upload a new file, create a new branch etc. there is also the concept of gist (Github) and snippet (Gitlab) which is for more informal sharing of files, think pastebin on steroids. > Not even to Download a file. well, that is slightly less obvious, I'll grant you that - the button is called [Raw] in Github, which you may have to Control click to get the file download dialog. in Gitlab there is a separate download icon (an arrow pointing down into a tray). -- regards, Kjetil T. From nobody Tue Mar 10 04:02:07 2020 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 EC4B33A10A6; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:02:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke_via_Datatracker?= To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke?= Message-ID: <158383812185.15459.5142442277630341183@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:02:01 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_Abstain_on_draf?= =?utf-8?q?t-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 11:02:03 -0000 Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Abstain When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I abstain with the meaning of "I oppose this document but understand that others differ and am not going to stand in the way of the others." per https://www.ietf.org/standards/process/iesg-ballots/ as the main issue (see below) cannot easily be fixed. I have also a couple of COMMENTs and I would appreciate an answer to those COMMENTs even if you can freely ignore my main ABSTAIN issue Is there a reason why "GitHub" is used rather than simply "Git" or similar system ? At least, it is explicit to be the commercial web site "github.com". Alternatives such as GitLab and BitBucket are only briefly mentioned. Section 1.3 has an amazing-to-my-eyes sentences "This document concentrates primarily on GitHub as it has a large and active community of contributors. As a result, some content might not be applicable to other similar services.". In my opinion, if the same reasoning was applied to other topics, the Internet will become centralized into popular applications without innovation. The document itself is clear, easy to read, and sensible except for the overlapping content with the companion document. Finally, the reason for my ABSTAIN ballot is that I cannot accept that an IETF document in 2020 proposes to use an IPv4-only commercial web site (see also the IAB statement https://www.iab.org/2016/11/07/iab-statement-on-ipv6 ). Let's eat our own dog food. Why not having a git repo on the IETF servers? -éric PS: as a side note, I use daily the "git" tools sometimes for private use on github.com but for professional use on a corporate-run git server. --- Start of COMMENT --- General comment: it appears that the two 'git' documents have very similar content. Was it considered to better split them or merge them? Section 3.2: a private repository is not free AFAIK with github.com. Which party will pay for those repos ? --- End of COMMENT --- From nobody Tue Mar 10 04:22:00 2020 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 3FA513A10D9; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:21:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 JL1JR-PGXQYI; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot1-x334.google.com (mail-ot1-x334.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::334]) (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 0E2103A10D8; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x334.google.com with SMTP id i14so12756194otp.5; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WgiTYfsFTBHRDXBq9wrVKJ93njEZ0051+lstrOo7HWM=; b=vd2hfag13F8ENTQ0rt+9BFdLm1mL86xRwEE41iH322wry5I6azyxOR3HiZAM8Db71y 6/ejU9pvR2WXppL8H+YNbWDaQvv9sppdtNUFZG0+MrkQKWJ5Zkv3+K6psspdXFVuFwqW WxyqD9mdVB65sgcpFXdMkKqfB3Hu/QDv66Qtt05Gp/GO9fqseTFLQVpQxmTg1qAnobWb SOE09Fh/fkD+V2KQEVeUBxaPjVaVHz6CNZ02XmmY5UfVSABR8Deyv9ClMwdWOmBv546w 4LLDAf0O0C0LGy+kZ5kgvDK4JZ0teu0axaHsjaT7H1lTSuJF3WgexaU5bh3Jt4IDGlS7 bPsg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WgiTYfsFTBHRDXBq9wrVKJ93njEZ0051+lstrOo7HWM=; b=L1j37TRfsqDLLm5jiXqZaVaqtdY9VJ7c3pOURnBZ9Wk1YQXAp7LiPF9ib+rJfu8mtc o8J3leRUuSXPrRH/d1MEeuEhpP8+1hRrDRz3fM16UwXBxefex2B2uYhOD4+yvOfmU44D n1Yg1JFYjxMH0Ay4jCwRfevmc9eLM3bTV9AB9889zEr+xERJ3L7sXbSYEOjeoXXlBebj p1SdJGcPXtPP/aINV3YQDZCbL8q8EHy+j69iqQE2PctB6/5lKmBa56G5iWlDtrE8w1Qf HwZnSH5hdrp3C2k7gaEbp08L6a/fA9xKcL7kuavcDsuQeeLkcwKIRoWHl6tmXy0PcQ5Y 2NJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2dOceNMQVxWdi1qVplzyp+faXAESdT3gtIAQCwlMZqtn/vR+LD Dovptj07o+LRvVMAGB1N/tNO3ePMBTc24O5anmwunQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vs2WwEGOlhJK8uyaamkN9j8LLZgjHyJbISlZ+HDwhEGvTwvSFZ+sA/LRwgYBw26D8JXGipQ0tV7jC/4cYV1VWI= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4c98:: with SMTP id m24mr8787310otf.158.1583839309332; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:21:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Tim Wicinski Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:21:38 -0400 Message-ID: To: Martin Thomson Cc: Barry Leiba , The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006a03c505a07e538b" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 11:21:52 -0000 --0000000000006a03c505a07e538b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1 on the new changes, particularly the changing of MUST to SHOULD on use of GitHub, along with the extra guidance. tim On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 1:33 AM Martin Thomson wrote: > Hi Barry, > > Thanks for reviewing. Your PR is > https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 > > Working group, please take a look at some of these changes; I think that > they are consistent with the existing intent, but they are substantive > changes. I've added *** in this email for those who want to see just the > proposed new text. > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 17:44, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote: > > Chairs need to assess whether the > > arguments offered represent new information or not. This can requir= e > > some discussion to determine accurately. Resolved issues MUST remain > > closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue. > > > > There seems to be an inconsistency here: WGCs decide whether new > information > > has been given, so it would seem that it=E2=80=99s the WGCs who decide = that an > issue > > should be reopened. But then we say there has to be consensus for it. > In > > addition to that appearing inconsistent, I=E2=80=99m not clear how one = would > determine > > whether there=E2=80=99s rough consensus to reopen an issue, if doing so= were > > controversial. > > The lens of fresh perspective is wonderful. I totally see your concern > now. > > That said, I think that this is good advice still, because it creates a > status quo bias in a good way: resolved issues stay resolved unless the W= G > reaches consensus that there is a need for a change. For a contentious > issue, it might be that there is no desire to relitigate the subject and > then nothing > > My original intent here was to advise against relitigation of difficult > issues. It is often the case that Working Groups revisit decisions over > time, but using an issue tracker creates an artifact that allows us to sa= y > "no, we decided X" and therefore avoid having the same debate over and > over. For reference, that text is: > > > Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consensus > MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented. > > The last sentence here is just a (bad) repetition of the introductory > sentence of the section. I want to remove that, but then beef this up a > little. > > ********* > > For long-running work items, new contributors often raise issues that > have already been resolved. Determining whether an issue requires > re-evaluation might require some discussion in the Working Group. Where > there was rough > consensus regarding the resolution of a contentious issue, there could be > a temptation to restart a debate. > > > > Chairs are empowered to exercise discretion in determining whether to > reopen issues. For more difficult matters, the chairs MAY insist that th= e > Working Group reach consensus on whether new an issue should be reopened. > Note however that any product of this process still needs to have the > support of rough consensus in the Working Group, which could justify > reopening issues. > > The crux of this is that we do empower chairs to guide debate and dictate > process (see Section 6.1 of BCP 25). The advice about consensus to reope= n > remains, but at a lesser strength (it's advice). And then there is a > reminder that failure to address a real problem can lead to failure of th= e > overall process; if you fail to address a problem, maybe WGLC fails. > > > Idle question: Would it make sense for this document to formally update > 2418? > > The current plan is to add this to BCP 25; there should be a note to the > editor to that effect. I think that is the right way to do this. Nothin= g > in here *changes* 2418. But it does add to it. > > > Why mention v4 only? Does such mention have archival value once github > > supports v6? > > Because people apparently love that subject. I will remove the albeit. > > > Please use the boilerplate directly from 8174: it was debated and worde= d > as it > > is intentionally. (That said, this is not a blocking comment.) > > Hah, I thought that I had managed to remove that variant from all of my > drafts :) And no one else complained... > > > Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for > > anything more than managing drafts. > > > > I=E2=80=99m not objecting to this, but... why? If the WGCs may decide = to use > github > > for drafts without involving the ADs, why can=E2=80=99t they also decid= e to use > it for > > charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs? > > You know, I think that is how it has always been. I think that if we're > going to the trouble of publishing an RFC on this topic, it's probably OK > to soften it. I'm going to propose two changes: SHOULD, and limiting thi= s > to the most extreme modes: > > ************ > > Chairs SHOULD involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub, > especially where substantive discussion of issues is permitted as describ= ed > in {{mode-discuss}}. > > Where that reference is to the section entitled "Issue Discussion Mode". > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > --0000000000006a03c505a07e538b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=C2=A0
=C2=A0 +1 on the new changes, particularly the = changing of MUST to SHOULD on use of GitHub, along=C2=A0
with the= extra guidance.=C2=A0

tim
<= br>
On Tue,= Mar 10, 2020 at 1:33 AM Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
Hi Barry,

Thanks for reviewing.=C2=A0 Your PR is https://git= hub.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43

Working group, please take a look at some of these changes; I think that th= ey are consistent with the existing intent, but they are substantive change= s.=C2=A0 I've added *** in this email for those who want to see just th= e proposed new text.

On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 17:44, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Chairs need to assess whether the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 arguments offered represent new information or not.=C2=A0= This can require
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0some discussion to determine accurately.=C2=A0 Resolved is= sues MUST remain
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue.
>
> There seems to be an inconsistency here: WGCs decide whether new infor= mation
> has been given, so it would seem that it=E2=80=99s the WGCs who decide= that an issue
> should be reopened.=C2=A0 But then we say there has to be consensus fo= r it.=C2=A0 In
> addition to that appearing inconsistent, I=E2=80=99m not clear how one= would determine
> whether there=E2=80=99s rough consensus to reopen an issue, if doing s= o were
> controversial.

The lens of fresh perspective is wonderful.=C2=A0 I totally see your concer= n now.

That said, I think that this is good advice still, because it creates a sta= tus quo bias in a good way: resolved issues stay resolved unless the WG rea= ches consensus that there is a need for a change.=C2=A0 For a contentious i= ssue, it might be that there is no desire to relitigate the subject and the= n nothing

My original intent here was to advise against relitigation of difficult iss= ues.=C2=A0 It is often the case that Working Groups revisit decisions over = time, but using an issue tracker creates an artifact that allows us to say = "no, we decided X" and therefore avoid having the same debate ove= r and over.=C2=A0 For reference, that text is:

> Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consensus= MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented.

The last sentence here is just a (bad) repetition of the introductory sente= nce of the section.=C2=A0 I want to remove that, but then beef this up a li= ttle.

*********
> For long-running work items, new contributors often raise issues that = have already been resolved. Determining whether an issue requires re-evalua= tion might require some discussion in the Working Group. Where there was ro= ugh
consensus regarding the resolution of a contentious issue, there could be a= temptation to restart a debate.
>
> Chairs are empowered to exercise discretion in determining whether to = reopen issues.=C2=A0 For more difficult matters, the chairs MAY insist that= the Working Group reach consensus on whether new an issue should be reopen= ed.=C2=A0 Note however that any product of this process still needs to have= the support of rough consensus in the Working Group, which could justify r= eopening issues.

The crux of this is that we do empower chairs to guide debate and dictate p= rocess (see Section 6.1 of BCP 25).=C2=A0 The advice about consensus to reo= pen remains, but at a lesser strength (it's advice).=C2=A0 And then the= re is a reminder that failure to address a real problem can lead to failure= of the overall process; if you fail to address a problem, maybe WGLC fails= .

> Idle question: Would it make sense for this document to formally updat= e 2418?

The current plan is to add this to BCP 25; there should be a note to the ed= itor to that effect.=C2=A0 I think that is the right way to do this.=C2=A0 = Nothing in here *changes* 2418.=C2=A0 But it does add to it.

> Why mention v4 only?=C2=A0 Does such mention have archival value once = github
> supports v6?

Because people apparently love that subject.=C2=A0 I will remove the albeit= .

> Please use the boilerplate directly from 8174: it was debated and word= ed as it
> is intentionally.=C2=A0 (That said, this is not a blocking comment.)
Hah, I thought that I had managed to remove that variant from all of my dra= fts :)=C2=A0 And no one else complained...

>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use= GitHub for
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 anything more than managing drafts.
>
> I=E2=80=99m not objecting to this, but... why?=C2=A0 If the WGCs may d= ecide to use github
> for drafts without involving the ADs, why can=E2=80=99t they also deci= de to use it for
> charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs?

You know, I think that is how it has always been.=C2=A0 I think that if we&= #39;re going to the trouble of publishing an RFC on this topic, it's pr= obably OK to soften it.=C2=A0 I'm going to propose two changes: SHOULD,= and limiting this to the most extreme modes:

************
> Chairs SHOULD involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub, es= pecially where substantive discussion of issues is permitted as described i= n {{mode-discuss}}.

Where that reference is to the section entitled "Issue Discussion Mode= ".

_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-gith= ub@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-= github
--0000000000006a03c505a07e538b-- From nobody Tue Mar 10 04:24:30 2020 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 918333A0C6D; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:24:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=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=isoc.org 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 LrU0OFKORdDm; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:24:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAM10-MW2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-mw2nam10on2077.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.94.77]) (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 D973E3A0C88; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:24:19 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=MUMq/xb8PvrZsS3zX1DMTB44EmT9xB40OaOgWS4Y/dtcsoi/NDYWPTai0T4olxLXWrGmE2Sd3/kU7V83nJ17DlEyr0bTW/ANKq1EIhA4zSeSfQ7n6rp7BN8ew0Er113hM9tIFfZ5mJ4GfSuSD6iaBE4eEK/Ww/U6TrUgf1r3Cn3cvVhputu/gy/N/75YBrlaH1FJ1jlswqbgVpTugKqvE1DrLFLcQDQhzN3cWbHzudWhyWIJXi0YTX2we6yfHEDehDC6Y3Ds0t+0lEyQRWHcvRZr2RAeQ03D56UC+65rUPEyUEy8FfR0kOlRCBe6Jsovj69WyKV4nH2Ie9BvzRTAvQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=HiHkKxEEoWWazro9nqdD+230LRBjh9iagftKQyUkmXQ=; b=nEieiMTGgVGQGlx2JndhxrhhNhtDtgjzrFOBNbBpdBP0bORJVeIOuc9+cevX1+cYkwbnhWd19pq3fOAzolhASsbQPw/rDNdvOnur8utI8s9Qung+rIrf7vBUiRMEArCxlj7yhVTiNiPWzBTCTw1g5kkCE8wDXNMhx7mZkszuOAHXn/Ie2SsfJFRT5DcmeNAGSAGJEZDTr25F4zSKh6yF/U2j7DV5r0ixSmeqWdhhwnVs1PdUr0OZbCFFz7Ms0Uj/Vodgh0llB2swPGxLwGLARlOt+7GID0D8wfsTG12HXqVBEA0vToCibrJnrfNzwTD1CImlTkW570e3fouPK66Qww== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=isoc.org; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=isoc.org; dkim=pass header.d=isoc.org; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.org; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=HiHkKxEEoWWazro9nqdD+230LRBjh9iagftKQyUkmXQ=; b=pQtzg2wrFK8DPbai6s4e0q7exzd9fudq/SaXZQHA7iwt0e5lgGNrqKYEvgMgKNTDhNP5P7aYiS/RxeSs+CEAntCZEKmXZZMbESy1FF53sYuD73IiF7NnpO3pEuNK1dinfOBv7zLJbdqUFVxN8buaNaBAGpa6KES/9YlefHa0Z6Q= Received: from MN2PR06MB6462.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:20d::23) by MN2PR06MB6751.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:203::22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.17; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:17 +0000 Received: from MN2PR06MB6462.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6dc6:42d2:7d33:343d]) by MN2PR06MB6462.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6dc6:42d2:7d33:343d%4]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.013; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:17 +0000 From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall To: Tim Wicinski , Martin Thomson CC: "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , The IESG , Barry Leiba , Christopher Wood Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV9s4d1fwwi7JexEak/z+75JtBDKhBry6W Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:17 +0000 Message-ID: References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=hall@isoc.org; x-originating-ip: [173.73.251.251] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8443e2d4-1b6f-4bf3-57b7-08d7c4e5925b x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR06MB6751: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 033857D0BD x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(346002)(39850400004)(366004)(376002)(396003)(136003)(199004)(189003)(86362001)(478600001)(5660300002)(9686003)(2906002)(66946007)(71200400001)(55016002)(54906003)(316002)(186003)(26005)(66446008)(66476007)(64756008)(66556008)(76116006)(110136005)(4326008)(7696005)(33656002)(6506007)(53546011)(8936002)(81156014)(52536014)(81166006)(966005)(8676002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR06MB6751; H:MN2PR06MB6462.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: isoc.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: G3hFrZ9SGzZfZZsNBGldJGcwUMKXQc+xGbe7lExFsfXL7ghptGH3iALSf/BT1knYMe02537SiWnvxG+d9cJkgMoVdZniwr13afk7rxA7hho7LeLkn/9GEvPjuwIdWWax7kp0paFLE5B7rIBhF2nWMg== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MN2PR06MB64628740DB89F040EF6C6243B1FF0MN2PR06MB6462namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8443e2d4-1b6f-4bf3-57b7-08d7c4e5925b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Mar 2020 11:24:17.5869 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: GfX0Dxj3eCXQMldvH0hty7V2uU2O+FuCPkMIfhz7VzQj85JotwbynGuLOq5uUK0j X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR06MB6751 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 11:24:23 -0000 --_000_MN2PR06MB64628740DB89F040EF6C6243B1FF0MN2PR06MB6462namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1, good changes ________________________________ From: Ietf-and-github on behalf of Tim W= icinski Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 7:21:38 AM To: Martin Thomson Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org ; ietf-and-github@ietf.org ; draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org ; The IESG ; Barry Leiba ; Christopher Wood Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-usin= g-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) +1 on the new changes, particularly the changing of MUST to SHOULD on use= of GitHub, along with the extra guidance. tim On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 1:33 AM Martin Thomson > wrote: Hi Barry, Thanks for reviewing. Your PR is https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-githu= b/pull/43 Working group, please take a look at some of these changes; I think that th= ey are consistent with the existing intent, but they are substantive change= s. I've added *** in this email for those who want to see just the propose= d new text. On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 17:44, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote: > Chairs need to assess whether the > arguments offered represent new information or not. This can require > some discussion to determine accurately. Resolved issues MUST remain > closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue. > > There seems to be an inconsistency here: WGCs decide whether new informat= ion > has been given, so it would seem that it=92s the WGCs who decide that an = issue > should be reopened. But then we say there has to be consensus for it. I= n > addition to that appearing inconsistent, I=92m not clear how one would de= termine > whether there=92s rough consensus to reopen an issue, if doing so were > controversial. The lens of fresh perspective is wonderful. I totally see your concern now= . That said, I think that this is good advice still, because it creates a sta= tus quo bias in a good way: resolved issues stay resolved unless the WG rea= ches consensus that there is a need for a change. For a contentious issue,= it might be that there is no desire to relitigate the subject and then not= hing My original intent here was to advise against relitigation of difficult iss= ues. It is often the case that Working Groups revisit decisions over time,= but using an issue tracker creates an artifact that allows us to say "no, = we decided X" and therefore avoid having the same debate over and over. Fo= r reference, that text is: > Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consensus MU= ST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented. The last sentence here is just a (bad) repetition of the introductory sente= nce of the section. I want to remove that, but then beef this up a little. ********* > For long-running work items, new contributors often raise issues that hav= e already been resolved. Determining whether an issue requires re-evaluatio= n might require some discussion in the Working Group. Where there was rough consensus regarding the resolution of a contentious issue, there could be a= temptation to restart a debate. > > Chairs are empowered to exercise discretion in determining whether to reo= pen issues. For more difficult matters, the chairs MAY insist that the Wor= king Group reach consensus on whether new an issue should be reopened. Not= e however that any product of this process still needs to have the support = of rough consensus in the Working Group, which could justify reopening issu= es. The crux of this is that we do empower chairs to guide debate and dictate p= rocess (see Section 6.1 of BCP 25). The advice about consensus to reopen r= emains, but at a lesser strength (it's advice). And then there is a remind= er that failure to address a real problem can lead to failure of the overal= l process; if you fail to address a problem, maybe WGLC fails.. > Idle question: Would it make sense for this document to formally update 2= 418? The current plan is to add this to BCP 25; there should be a note to the ed= itor to that effect. I think that is the right way to do this. Nothing in= here *changes* 2418. But it does add to it. > Why mention v4 only? Does such mention have archival value once github > supports v6? Because people apparently love that subject. I will remove the albeit.. > Please use the boilerplate directly from 8174: it was debated and worded = as it > is intentionally. (That said, this is not a blocking comment.) Hah, I thought that I had managed to remove that variant from all of my dra= fts :) And no one else complained... > Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for > anything more than managing drafts. > > I=92m not objecting to this, but... why? If the WGCs may decide to use g= ithub > for drafts without involving the ADs, why can=92t they also decide to use= it for > charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs? You know, I think that is how it has always been. I think that if we're go= ing to the trouble of publishing an RFC on this topic, it's probably OK to = soften it. I'm going to propose two changes: SHOULD, and limiting this to = the most extreme modes: ************ > Chairs SHOULD involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub, espec= ially where substantive discussion of issues is permitted as described in {= {mode-discuss}}. Where that reference is to the section entitled "Issue Discussion Mode". _______________________________________________ Ietf-and-github mailing list Ietf-and-github@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github --_000_MN2PR06MB64628740DB89F040EF6C6243B1FF0MN2PR06MB6462namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1, good changes

From: Ietf-and-github <i= etf-and-github-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@= gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 7:21:38 AM
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org <git-chairs@ietf.org>; ietf-and-github= @ietf.org <ietf-and-github@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-git-using-github@iet= f.org <draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org>; The IESG <iesg@ietf.= org>; Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>; Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-g= it-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
 
 
  +1 on the new changes, particularly the changing of MUST to= SHOULD on use of GitHub, along 
with the extra guidance. 

tim

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 1:33 AM Mar= tin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net= > wrote:
Hi Barry,

Thanks for reviewing.  Your PR is https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43

Working group, please take a look at some of these changes; I think that th= ey are consistent with the existing intent, but they are substantive change= s.  I've added *** in this email for those who want to see just the pr= oposed new text.

On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 17:44, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote:
>    Chairs need to assess whether the
>    arguments offered represent new information or not. = This can require
>   some discussion to determine accurately.  Resolved is= sues MUST remain
>    closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue.
>
> There seems to be an inconsistency here: WGCs decide whether new infor= mation
> has been given, so it would seem that it=92s the WGCs who decide that = an issue
> should be reopened.  But then we say there has to be consensus fo= r it.  In
> addition to that appearing inconsistent, I=92m not clear how one would= determine
> whether there=92s rough consensus to reopen an issue, if doing so were=
> controversial.

The lens of fresh perspective is wonderful.  I totally see your concer= n now.

That said, I think that this is good advice still, because it creates a sta= tus quo bias in a good way: resolved issues stay resolved unless the WG rea= ches consensus that there is a need for a change.  For a contentious i= ssue, it might be that there is no desire to relitigate the subject and then nothing

My original intent here was to advise against relitigation of difficult iss= ues.  It is often the case that Working Groups revisit decisions over = time, but using an issue tracker creates an artifact that allows us to say = "no, we decided X" and therefore avoid having the same debate over and over.  For reference, that text is:
> Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consensus= MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented.

The last sentence here is just a (bad) repetition of the introductory sente= nce of the section.  I want to remove that, but then beef this up a li= ttle.

*********
> For long-running work items, new contributors often raise issues that = have already been resolved. Determining whether an issue requires re-evalua= tion might require some discussion in the Working Group. Where there was ro= ugh
consensus regarding the resolution of a contentious issue, there could be a= temptation to restart a debate.
>
> Chairs are empowered to exercise discretion in determining whether to = reopen issues.  For more difficult matters, the chairs MAY insist that= the Working Group reach consensus on whether new an issue should be reopen= ed.  Note however that any product of this process still needs to have the support of rough consensus in the Working = Group, which could justify reopening issues.

The crux of this is that we do empower chairs to guide debate and dictate p= rocess (see Section 6.1 of BCP 25).  The advice about consensus to reo= pen remains, but at a lesser strength (it's advice).  And then there i= s a reminder that failure to address a real problem can lead to failure of the overall process; if you fail to address= a problem, maybe WGLC fails..

> Idle question: Would it make sense for this document to formally updat= e 2418?

The current plan is to add this to BCP 25; there should be a note to the ed= itor to that effect.  I think that is the right way to do this.  = Nothing in here *changes* 2418.  But it does add to it.

> Why mention v4 only?  Does such mention have archival value once = github
> supports v6?

Because people apparently love that subject.  I will remove the albeit= ..

> Please use the boilerplate directly from 8174: it was debated and word= ed as it
> is intentionally.  (That said, this is not a blocking comment.)
Hah, I thought that I had managed to remove that variant from all of my dra= fts :)  And no one else complained...

>    Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use= GitHub for
>    anything more than managing drafts.
>
> I=92m not objecting to this, but... why?  If the WGCs may decide = to use github
> for drafts without involving the ADs, why can=92t they also decide to = use it for
> charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs?

You know, I think that is how it has always been.  I think that if we'= re going to the trouble of publishing an RFC on this topic, it's probably O= K to soften it.  I'm going to propose two changes: SHOULD, and limitin= g this to the most extreme modes:

************
> Chairs SHOULD involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub, es= pecially where substantive discussion of issues is permitted as described i= n {{mode-discuss}}.

Where that reference is to the section entitled "Issue Discussion Mode= ".

_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-gith= ub@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-= github
--_000_MN2PR06MB64628740DB89F040EF6C6243B1FF0MN2PR06MB6462namp_-- From nobody Tue Mar 10 04:39:08 2020 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 BE1EE3A1136 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:39:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aDFlcq_EdQxQ for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:39:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 4BF2D3A1134 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:39:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ABd3QP035939; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:39:03 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 33B99204E79; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:39:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 285612048E3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:39:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ABd3VQ016334; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:39:03 +0100 To: Martin Thomson Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <53307b7c-8575-9d7d-5504-d9dd7f7d5097@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:39:03 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] document editing and protocol implementation absent from draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 11:39:07 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 06:50, Martin Thomson a écrit : [...] >>> 3.1. What to Use GitHub For >> >> This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to me to say >> What to Use GitHub For. This is what it should be used for: share >> Internet Drafts and share code implementing protocols. > > That is in the Introduction and Document Goals sections[...] I think that is not the case. It does say in Introduction and Document Goals that one goal is document editing. It does not say in either section that a goal of using github is to write software for protocol developped by that WG. Were it to say so, I would discuss it further. In one WG I am active I hesitate between recommending github for software writing, or another one. Alex From nobody Tue Mar 10 04:47:11 2020 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 A41BA3A1133; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:47:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.013 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.013 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yi0yXbgIdYaX; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:47:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 D795A3A0CF8; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:46:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ABkvFh038604; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:46:57 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id ED328204BDF; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:46:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6CF201F0B; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:46:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ABkuIR020044; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:46:56 +0100 To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme , last-call@ietf.org Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github.all@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <68bda8ec830a149be968181d5a10df8881116004.camel@ifi.uio.no> <76525d93-313e-da68-9670-f26a39e532ad@gmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <2b3ba98a-f818-73de-42f2-79e277ce528c@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:46:56 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:09 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 11:47, Kjetil Torgrim Homme a écrit : > On Tue, 2020-03-10 at 11:29 +0100, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> Le 10/03/2020 à 07:05, Kjetil Torgrim Homme a écrit : >>> - despite my efforts of explaining, people still prefer to >>>> exchange >>>> the files by email. This feedback is from working with several >>>> groups on several xml drafts on several github repositories. >>> >>> both Github and Gitlab have good web based editors which can >>> recommended to Git skeptics >> >> I heard that skepticism from many people in a hurry. They dont have >> time to get imposed some rule. >> >> It is difficult to understand some parts of the github behaviours. >> >> Especially by those who do shared document processing by using other >> document sharing tools like github. >> >> This is the gist of it: having a beautiful modern web interface, >> makes one think that GitHub easily supports things like uploading a >> document. It is not the case. There is no button on the web to >> Upload a file. > > it is right up there in the file browser in Github, > > [Create new file] [Upload files] [Find File] 'Find file' is a term that means to open a file, if expressed in Mac, or it means to search and find a file if expressed in Windows. It is misleading. The particular need is the following: I want to download the file. I do not want to display it first and only then download it. It is too long. So, I think my need is the following: I want a big visible button on github to quickly download a file, and not to have to go through numerous other buttons first. Then, I want to update a file, not to upload a new one. The fact that there are is no straight button to update a file leads to generation of many files in the same folder. I upload a file with -AP in name, others put theirs, and we end up with too many files. > in Gitlab there is a generic [+ v] dropdown menu to upload a new file, > create a new branch etc. > > there is also the concept of gist (Github) and snippet (Gitlab) which > is for more informal sharing of files, think pastebin on steroids. > >> Not even to Download a file. > > well, that is slightly less obvious, I'll grant you that - the button > is called [Raw] in Github, which you may have to Control click to get > the file download dialog. in Gitlab there is a separate download icon > (an arrow pointing down into a tray). Thank you for the explanation. I did not know that. I think I might need to put it in my howto. Alex > From nobody Tue Mar 10 04:51:34 2020 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 447033A1156 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:51:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=sVkP/j/c; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=q8AUcUYa 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 6_7_j6Rb0reH for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB793A1160 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:51:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C1CA07; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:51:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:51:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=wM95hqpVFmf+MVYAlK1+Yr9V+XiH AA0sKh757CpliK4=; b=sVkP/j/csEwYheQf2Fq+g+vVRrIy5WOd0tBzWl7N5mzF oMzhmplbKQLWI/oYyZ9S+XDDgVwsbRSzn2fXGVDlduX8Lq6AcT8OHL/hpbpdBHSf rYO6TOpZ9ieYv8WplgwED3pn5tQU4nFEzl0bJU/ENbDdNIDE9PUOzTCnU09pgVsE O8L+qlQHtp7w6K3d+3n6+BmsSitygfGa5uhVCcWuoq+//nLcGEn363L2GnYcWN+2 jihNaf/0QyhEiAeLGzUWB6cjijzFbxrhE+HiLOXWveVq1uP3b+L+5NnUTU3Z/k7Q Wyo+7iFRWuOHmDSoacltZEQhzpt7LDOe4JtX5MoKGA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=wM95hq pVFmf+MVYAlK1+Yr9V+XiHAA0sKh757CpliK4=; b=q8AUcUYaOKAB22igyRYX9c TP//VOtqX0TPUqrGoVCFsrZ4UU3buB8dUTuE71O6PpHnKzHbcZPqK/PSF/YAZdCJ e2tkSSW+igDapj7mUzl9oe2qLSppIoWvRzoLwfdME+3fa0JnF4k/LWZKLRLqWJRx hwKkS0tbC8T18w51nnqt1MaTVjXo8YFoIMJTC/OHSJr2WNjOFTQ1dLm6HieQZuz/ YxPkpMY4D5xso+X17VRARGa1xBLjQwu27ib0Nm/nbfEHxIdOAdzGNOLib5BlRlHp pmY134+FBuywKXx5qhHC6vcieQVirPjWjRdm8Y3VUuMKJIqgmvFRqPA4PxALYfKQ == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvtddgfedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehquhhitgifghdrohhrghdpghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgv rhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhroh hphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 13F8EE00BB; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:51:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <45abf8fd-0465-4125-94a3-1688930ebe94@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4499a1bb-eb83-1eac-5e69-e46f6df3f332@gmail.com> References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <4499a1bb-eb83-1eac-5e69-e46f6df3f332@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 22:51:03 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Alexandre Petrescu" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?=5BLast-Call=5D_Genart_last_call_rev?= =?utf-8?q?iew_of_draft-ietf-git-using-github-04?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 11:51:32 -0000 On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 21:24, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: > In that case, it would be better to say > > NEW: > > Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request > > to obtain the changes made to a repository. After Barry's review it says: A pull request is a GitHub feature that allows a user to request a change to a repository. > > In most cases, you > > don't even have to make an effort to do so because modern software > > has largely left the baggage of the past behind. We've recently > > added the real names of contributors to the QUIC specs and it just > > worked. > > Was it with Windows 10? Yes. And Mac and Linux variously. I just took the names I was given and used copy and paste. > Were these the names I said? See https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#name-contributors https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3283/files From nobody Tue Mar 10 04:54:40 2020 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 0EDDE3A117B for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:54:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 7ZKzjSDx8x23 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot1-x32f.google.com (mail-ot1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32f]) (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 B5DA53A1159 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:54:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id a9so6628991otl.6 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:54:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jdksseRBh3SlIWxMRcqdV51MmcWyi60BazMyJyM4A8o=; b=MHo2ThrBKwRIx1iLJjDfoywugyR/h6z1IF52zMDhmv/3rav4WczI90QkYtQ21quqVU SqlKxRSvZJ2+W0z4BtdRbnja0zkmmEZacseU8UVKUUsGCqtxXAguKaH0owxi9kPdP4EE 6APHND3L3izQLJr7XTJd8bZi5u3EJrse0Wai8SgVVKQXQ8jMavCIkob5QHB0zriRTeae gJPBUnItQt+QnUKSY526n10Gpq85an7UnKun8mjU5zWcl0MTU9yoaNObprUAA4rY8IEF 14KVR5xpyhJ4rzIBf0pYZxNNptwLfP7Z+P30wYsuUfgkekqQj4V8N/eYJGbB4pNG3QFG lcng== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jdksseRBh3SlIWxMRcqdV51MmcWyi60BazMyJyM4A8o=; b=liNVcfjRwGcTszSbGyLyz8NcwFsTQUmnQ+IfYlAkq1CN96z+XZtHEVLMfT7iBwBk6R QonrHWMNmCvk7VgY4tajIyjnHrnOxmEpNBV2fykUjEv8oFfheUYvqrO3tB80Vvf7gNWB pQPwwNl9JQb7LMKiGu+WQQzrW4vR39qrc/iCkouADzUneyUsaMxB+P5Qezc7UMjyx31i YKkqHq8Xb/EqrRPb4y5g/b3vLc1TZQTr1dyt+kIJSszuVoNueTyeHMhVU3AJetRounG+ G+4HiJOggDjocOFJD7iChNSEHgaNnlc7TtSA/UTfW7g4ms+D9aZnTS4McpWZcowViucw uuuQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2acXktlqHhWetZG2oCVCBdrV8c5Jx+4zHyseRirPxqQonV7fj/ cndZFK7PlMUGUY+oBJKcI2UXDezWjFO8MU5krXY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtSIqTkk6+9DbEWS06qAVk6oPPxQ0rsuR+C+Tm/etZjgyRBRyQxLoXbnnoPtYXOXD3URXyAcZ/WM9qQJel2rNw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:18ce:: with SMTP id v14mr17248062ote.4.1583841263835; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 04:54:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <53307b7c-8575-9d7d-5504-d9dd7f7d5097@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <53307b7c-8575-9d7d-5504-d9dd7f7d5097@gmail.com> From: Tim Wicinski Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:54:12 -0400 Message-ID: To: Alexandre Petrescu Cc: Martin Thomson , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e95fdc05a07ec79f" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] document editing and protocol implementation absent from draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 11:54:39 -0000 --000000000000e95fdc05a07ec79f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This document very much stays away from suggesting using github to write software for protocol development. I would argue that the decision on which tools to use in a WG project should be decided by the WG based on needs, etc. tim On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:39 AM Alexandre Petrescu < alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Le 10/03/2020 =C3=A0 06:50, Martin Thomson a =C3=A9crit : > [...] > >>> 3.1. What to Use GitHub For > >> > >> This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to me to say > >> What to Use GitHub For. This is what it should be used for: share > >> Internet Drafts and share code implementing protocols. > > > > That is in the Introduction and Document Goals sections[...] > > I think that is not the case. > > It does say in Introduction and Document Goals that one goal is document > editing. > > It does not say in either section that a goal of using github is to > write software for protocol developped by that WG. > > Were it to say so, I would discuss it further. In one WG I am active I > hesitate between recommending github for software writing, or another one= . > > Alex > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > --000000000000e95fdc05a07ec79f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This document very much stays away from suggestin= g using github to write software for protocol development.
I woul= d argue that the decision on which tools to use in a WG project should be d= ecided by the WG based on=C2=A0
needs, etc.=C2=A0=C2=A0

tim


On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:39 AM Ale= xandre Petrescu <alexand= re.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:


Le 10/03/2020 =C3=A0 06:50, Martin Thomson a =C3=A9crit :
[...]
>>> 3.1.=C2=A0 What to Use GitHub For
>>
>> This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to me to sa= y
>> What to Use GitHub For.=C2=A0 This is what it should be used for: = share
>> Internet Drafts and share code implementing protocols.
>
> That is in the Introduction and Document Goals sections[...]

I think that is not the case.

It does say in Introduction and Document Goals that one goal is document editing.

It does not say in either section that a goal of using github is to
write software for protocol developped by that WG.

Were it to say so, I would discuss it further.=C2=A0 In one WG I am active = I
hesitate between recommending github for software writing, or another one.<= br>
Alex

_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-gith= ub@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-= github
--000000000000e95fdc05a07ec79f-- From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:03:46 2020 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 653843A119E; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:03:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=UcRTNDpN; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=oLA1xOXy 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 kdu7v0sq8Wu2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:03:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C93993A119A; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:03:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3E4821F55; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:03:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:03:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=dY PN1b1pz5nNiPyt4vGB7ffxz71tluklZfn5Kdp9ZlU=; b=UcRTNDpNLJUA+21E/0 ENRHWJc8a9w8dP3LJfnPhD00iafJawVFevt/l1NlhqMK21VaYCsJ08zKB6nJ2Yga wMoMvPEzyKXo6cHJY7Q7PcDQX3eqAft9LKuzWUXHPLwsvqGKd4GPSMGzBWtMZUM4 5q2pIyPlrdKW4CicdEP23OvWe+tuEFfuVdHztB4DR2VevDeYc4bvnZlPtMYaa1Yq dXP5uz6GS+PhPVX0fCkXCg3isA/jbXuVhi8Ohu2Q9MTRu/DewsB/4EWJsyK8DRjR mdqy4FgTbh52fP7AUrarJNr/sicvte0tIQAKveDbFbZSFL7Uc+/XANUb++pnli8w 2qzw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=dYPN1b1pz5nNiPyt4vGB7ffxz71tluklZfn5Kdp9Z lU=; b=oLA1xOXyOxsAlrkVI5DGJtu7cS4JfOrx122FYD5+JajJKC0TVXCNoOKoU Abq9lZTRFbKvsbMfzsLowwUwPIiO6kl5GQTp4tgJgYW9jZs5nur47APFcHoute9x JUUjSFRg3QipFjQB1tmt/IOhvfOGJXtyQzd9Pgwpd1CqroHiLFMGC4z2O5q7LFdU //nk2MF3BJ1CC7/eCPTC1B+gUqF/LOl25COVV++Xtzun5z8AalhI1HPjMNJ5KSVA pxiI+0ErudU2/haddDzObwWeP4OeUdgaZI/uOpXmqy8o7tYPJb+3dekewLWgZ9Og IImFGJocmBayG/kwxBA+oITc92HAA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvtddgfeegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhgihhthhhusgdrsghlohhgnecuvehluhhs thgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnth hrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 324E6E00AC; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:03:36 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <962a022c-be3e-4dba-9ed7-39c3ecbb2b17@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <158383812185.15459.5142442277630341183@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158383812185.15459.5142442277630341183@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:02:41 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_Abstain_on_draf?= =?utf-8?q?t-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:03:41 -0000 Hi =C3=89ric, I understand the reasons for your abstention. I hope that these respons= es help, even if I'm guessing that they won't address your concerns. On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 22:02, =C3=89ric Vyncke via Datatracker wrote: > Is there a reason why "GitHub" is used rather than simply "Git" or sim= ilar > system ? At least, it is explicit to be the commercial web site "githu= b.com". > Alternatives such as GitLab and BitBucket are only briefly mentioned. Because that is what people are using. And we've seen significant payba= ck from that. Both in terms of using common - and therefore well-mainta= ined - tools and in terms of accessing an existing community of contribu= tors. I personally do this in full appreciation for the drawbacks, both in ter= ms of centralization and technology. For the former, git is good about = that, and we've a strategy (in -configuration primarily) for mitigating = risks associated with centralization. As for IPv6, I'm not prepared to = stand on principle in this case, but respect the choice of others to do = so. FWIW, the alternatives are pretty good, and most have all of the same ca= pabilities (some are even better in some ways). Working groups probably= won't suffer too badly for a choice of an alternative service. But for= me access to a wider community of contributors is - unfortunately - a d= etermining factor. > General comment: it appears that the two 'git' documents have very sim= ilar > content. Was it considered to better split them or merge them? This was debated at some length in the working group. This one will end= up having BCP status. I suspect that the other will have less long-ter= m utility as it is more tactical. =20 > Section 3.2: a private repository is not free AFAIK with github.com. W= hich > party will pay for those repos ? Private repositories are offered for free, with some limitations. https= ://github.blog/2019-01-07-new-year-new-github/ From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:06:51 2020 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 5BFE23A11A6 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:06:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=m6bQ4uqy; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=r+mvd9ni 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 ctfKLs6xoysX for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:06:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AB6C3A11A4 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B61FA21C4D; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:06:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:06:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=hc 4GCDX1s6+q7YwXTCC47ggoByABFyM2a4BvQil/rRY=; b=m6bQ4uqy2t3Di+h6wC mEe8J2wB/+kgujeQBcEEq+NCTJ/anBAA1DtqFpvBJy3lxYzJ+5NXyOM0gfM+ASxG K7gERQdstlxP2gS4P6Qw5/JfrV7IGjwf3yPYbPj8oj0mpPL5Kh3NN46MCoIqX4bP GChs9AgVUYMkDC74QDUy5wqk+tMzn0rhkQrqCnNbqjoeaXSfQSWfMEfdiQ2UoXu4 u1Z57psozo81FoWV1dPfIMesogQOHf7rwt1iUdN4oZD0GtEDLudWQgn0VN9N5FJT V7OzVRgHnswfO8q6yPteQc2wdA/M0IzapXdxLlPUKRXKANrRaMg9RJtIeOJeX3Xx HSng== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=hc4GCDX1s6+q7YwXTCC47ggoByABFyM2a4BvQil/r RY=; b=r+mvd9nipE2B+ABiRPZfoC/SowXGwg9kYIuoC+1Qmgx3Ouqu1iE2FgMAT EtnXCVfzQ+Y520N+CLP8etPkfeCdOqAYuOYhD1qdGZu9L2Xr9E1ABYApDMZPnlbV 6CA/LMmIAV2nkXx+egSAO9fqjvvjTPZ8eEY2lvQY2KBcpJf+a+9LZ+oA1gjNEzET LPGLLftboo/eEy9M1o1h3l1F0HJK4XZGnjxTzJliCgq+cUeR9AmX++QuF5jpbMr2 nEyeA+QpJdfhb0PF7u7BU1kBzdT7dV48+6mYdHHjj08FdkAPzCnsD3uJH9FVkQ91 26LhgG9aJ09u9CQFLmYzRKGCpAUfQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvtddgfeegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghr rghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 705FBE00AC; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:06:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1e6d4ab9-e647-48a6-8b25-3a904d96df47@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <53307b7c-8575-9d7d-5504-d9dd7f7d5097@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:06:25 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Tim Wicinski" , "Alexandre Petrescu" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?document_editing_and_protocol_implem?= =?utf-8?q?entation_absent_from_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:06:50 -0000 Thanks Tim, I agree. The document concentrates on document production. Though GitHub is prob= ably even better suited to software development, that's not an activity = that the IETF needs to have such a strong hand in. If a working group w= anted to develop a reference implementation or a test suite or other cod= e product, then I would definitely recommend GitHub. But that is rare e= nough to treat on an ad hoc basis. Many people will use the tool for tha= t purpose and more power to them for doing so, but we don't need support= ing documents for that. On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 22:54, Tim Wicinski wrote: >=20 > This document very much stays away from suggesting using github to=20 > write software for protocol development. > I would argue that the decision on which tools to use in a WG project=20= > should be decided by the WG based on=20 > needs, etc.=20 >=20 > tim >=20 >=20 > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:39 AM Alexandre Petrescu=20 > wrote: > >=20 > >=20 > > Le 10/03/2020 =C3=A0 06:50, Martin Thomson a =C3=A9crit : > > [...] > > >>> 3.1. What to Use GitHub For > > >>=20 > > >> This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to me to = say > > >> What to Use GitHub For. This is what it should be used for: shar= e > > >> Internet Drafts and share code implementing protocols. > > >=20 > > > That is in the Introduction and Document Goals sections[...] > >=20 > > I think that is not the case. > >=20 > > It does say in Introduction and Document Goals that one goal is doc= ument=20 > > editing. > >=20 > > It does not say in either section that a goal of using github is to= =20 > > write software for protocol developped by that WG. > >=20 > > Were it to say so, I would discuss it further. In one WG I am activ= e I=20 > > hesitate between recommending github for software writing, or anoth= er one. > >=20 > > Alex > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:14:33 2020 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 D685F3A11BE for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:14:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TkTdHeW1Ae0H for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:14:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 24C2B3A11BB for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:14:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ACEMig047154; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:14:22 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 2683220254F; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:14:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 186A6202228; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:14:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ACEMCS032612; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:14:22 +0100 To: Martin Thomson Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <4499a1bb-eb83-1eac-5e69-e46f6df3f332@gmail.com> <45abf8fd-0465-4125-94a3-1688930ebe94@www.fastmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <9808d935-1306-623b-1377-d98f29af8769@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:14:21 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <45abf8fd-0465-4125-94a3-1688930ebe94@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:14:31 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 12:51, Martin Thomson a écrit : > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 21:24, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> In that case, it would be better to say >> >> NEW: >>> Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request >>> to obtain the changes made to a repository. > > After Barry's review it says: > > A pull request is a GitHub feature that allows a user to request a change to a repository. > > >>> In most cases, you >>> don't even have to make an effort to do so because modern software >>> has largely left the baggage of the past behind. We've recently >>> added the real names of contributors to the QUIC specs and it just >>> worked. >> >> Was it with Windows 10? > > Yes. And Mac and Linux variously. I just took the names I was given and used copy and paste. I am surprised. I just checked with Windows 10, emacs, github and xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org and it becomes this "Ole Troean". That name is an error. We know correct name. The same might happen with the name Jérôme Härri - I expect the ä to become an 'ae' that is an error. You can check for yourself, if the github maintainer gives you access. It is there https://github.com/Kottapalli-Naveen/SLAAC-Prefix-Length Alex > >> Were these the names I said? > > See > https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#name-contributors > https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3283/files There is no ä ? I guess it's like ü maybe. Alex > From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:18:57 2020 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 DF1D53A11CE for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:18:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jUZXqoW3yh0r for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 3552E3A11D0 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ACIqDi048594 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:18:52 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 8B18B203E94 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:18:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81459203BBA for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:18:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ACIq9I002272 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:18:52 +0100 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <4499a1bb-eb83-1eac-5e69-e46f6df3f332@gmail.com> <45abf8fd-0465-4125-94a3-1688930ebe94@www.fastmail.com> <9808d935-1306-623b-1377-d98f29af8769@gmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:18:52 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9808d935-1306-623b-1377-d98f29af8769@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:18:56 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 13:14, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit : > > > Le 10/03/2020 à 12:51, Martin Thomson a écrit : >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 21:24, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >>> In that case, it would be better to say >>> >>> NEW: >>>> Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request >>>> to obtain the changes made to a repository. >> >> After Barry's review it says: >> >> A pull request is a GitHub feature that allows a user to request a >> change to a repository. >> >> >>>> In most cases, you >>>> don't even have to make an effort to do so because modern software >>>> has largely left the baggage of the past behind.  We've recently >>>> added the real names of contributors to the QUIC specs and it just >>>> worked. >>> >>> Was it with Windows 10? >> >> Yes.  And Mac and Linux variously.  I just took the names I was given >> and used copy and paste. > > I am surprised. > > I just checked with Windows 10, emacs, github and xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org > > and it becomes this "Ole Troean". > > That name is an error.  We know correct name. > > The same might happen with the name Jérôme Härri - I expect the ä to > become an 'ae' that is an error. > > You can check for yourself, if the github maintainer gives you access. > It is there https://github.com/Kottapalli-Naveen/SLAAC-Prefix-Length > > Alex > >> >>> Were these the names I said? >> >> See >> https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#name-contributors >> >> https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3283/files > > There is no ä ?  I guess it's like ü maybe. > > Alex Which makes me wonder whether access control to github is discussed? Alex > >> > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:20:26 2020 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 803393A11D9 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:20:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 zPu5i0fHsvN3 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:20:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 8F8583A11D8 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:20:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050095.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02ACGvnO022421; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:20:20 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=8EjWR8+aHQPDIVfp/lJX+WZp7WNlfALwUCaMP5e+HOE=; b=NFZr4TlfPBM194drKf2j5/ENk295Mxja+hEPMmKFE4WWjkqP2kQuhZDCdxBdfEXI6K3T HG2H/EiQAe9RYqCjioPPcpcRGpCRiPRptPYoKpp3GZetX9OLxV7Blm7sIXHzYRvSrcBj whDU8d/+dXz+riSc6yj7kSiUkPnvFNZjA+61GtIVfVh3QwJMpwJJx/mv0K4kWtu+aEMY Ym4nDZqtjCVgDKhkyk+XftqWoKcKuUX1WmYk51HhIQY+cBVVFXlsSP/u6Iwd+IGyxXCr NuHlsoYAzK/T/jnZU9oIyOlKYogdTKlbNw33fgc9jbQdvT5zybFdUOfGeUdtJv87cH24 sA== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint1 (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [184.51.33.18] (may be forged)) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2ym41ac9d3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:20:20 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02ACHKL7013958; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:20:19 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ym7u0r1t0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:20:19 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:20:18 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:20:18 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson , Barry Leiba CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV9p2ERxOCaLxoBEu0ZnO0rvTbBahBv0oA Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:20:17 +0000 Message-ID: References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.113.213] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-10_06:2020-03-10, 2020-03-10 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=631 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002050000 definitions=main-2003100083 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-10_06:2020-03-10, 2020-03-10 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=606 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1015 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2003100083 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:20:24 -0000 PiAgICBUaGFua3MgZm9yIHJldmlld2luZy4gIFlvdXIgUFIgaXMgaHR0cHM6Ly9naXRodWIuY29t L2lldGYtZ2l0d2cvdXNpbmctZ2l0aHViL3B1bGwvNDMNCiAgDQpJIHJlYWQgdGhlIFBSIGFuZCBp dCdzIGZpbmUuICBNeSBvbmx5IHRha2UtYXdheSBpcyAid2hhdCwgYWdhaW4gd2l0aCB0aGUgSVB2 NCB0aGluZz8iIGJ1dCBpZiB0aGF0J3MgdGhlIHByaWNlIG9mIGNsZWFyaW5nIGEgRElTQ1VTUyBv aCB3ZWxsLg0KDQogDQoNCg== From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:20:41 2020 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 158353A11E8 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:20:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rg7N0UbNe_tX for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:20:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.148]) (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 131B33A11DB for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:20:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ACKShe026244; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:20:28 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id A2E85203E94; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:20:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 932CC203BBA; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:20:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ACKSF4002987; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:20:28 +0100 To: Martin Thomson , Tim Wicinski Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <53307b7c-8575-9d7d-5504-d9dd7f7d5097@gmail.com> <1e6d4ab9-e647-48a6-8b25-3a904d96df47@www.fastmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <6ff320e9-cc4a-5fda-0aed-d65e5221e9ad@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:20:28 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1e6d4ab9-e647-48a6-8b25-3a904d96df47@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] document editing and protocol implementation absent from draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:20:40 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 13:06, Martin Thomson a écrit : > Thanks Tim, I agree. > > The document concentrates on document production. Though GitHub is > probably even better suited to software development, that's not an > activity that the IETF needs to have such a strong hand in. If a > working group wanted to develop a reference implementation or a test > suite or other code product, then I would definitely recommend > GitHub. But that is rare enough to treat on an ad hoc basis. Many > people will use the tool for that purpose and more power to them for > doing so, but we don't need supporting documents for that. In the WGs where I work often times the implementations are referred to github. Many implementations are there. But indeed there are more places where the software code is put,more than just github. The question would be whether to recommend one (github?), or a list of them. Alex > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 22:54, Tim Wicinski wrote: >> >> This document very much stays away from suggesting using github to >> write software for protocol development. I would argue that the >> decision on which tools to use in a WG project should be decided by >> the WG based on needs, etc. >> >> tim >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:39 AM Alexandre Petrescu >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Le 10/03/2020 à 06:50, Martin Thomson a écrit : [...] >>>>>> 3.1. What to Use GitHub For >>>>> >>>>> This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to me >>>>> to say What to Use GitHub For. This is what it should be used >>>>> for: share Internet Drafts and share code implementing >>>>> protocols. >>>> >>>> That is in the Introduction and Document Goals sections[...] >>> >>> I think that is not the case. >>> >>> It does say in Introduction and Document Goals that one goal is >>> document editing. >>> >>> It does not say in either section that a goal of using github is >>> to write software for protocol developped by that WG. >>> >>> Were it to say so, I would discuss it further. In one WG I am >>> active I hesitate between recommending github for software >>> writing, or another one. >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> _______________________________________________ Ietf-and-github >>> mailing list Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:22:57 2020 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 2FA743A11E0 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:22:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EJUIwQ_R31wx for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:22:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 9EFF83A11E2 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:22:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ACMpew030907 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:22:51 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 929FD2037EC for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:22:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87EEE20254F for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:22:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ACMpab004167 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:22:51 +0100 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <8df960e1-8ddc-5092-30ac-8fceb6ea4b29@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:22:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:22:55 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 13:20, Salz, Rich a écrit : >> Thanks for reviewing. Your PR is https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 > > I read the PR and it's fine. My only take-away is "what, again with the IPv4 thing?" but if that's the price of clearing a DISCUSS oh well. There was a list of protocols people use at IETF. Some of them were IPv6 enabled. A few are IPv4 only, and critical (BCP?) now(?). If one made this INFORMATIONAL then there would be less worry? Alex > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:34:45 2020 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 3DADA3A121E; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:34:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=l50/RVWd; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=gP/wiNiK 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 YvjBFubqupaT; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:34:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 824EE3A1217; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:34:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3852; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1583843641; x=1585053241; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=lmTLiq1xGhkUbQm+J10ILrf+mg2rh0/F2E8dO3DrPfQ=; b=l50/RVWdaSWZxmKRl+iw1D9TAPw0T4eDwq4Mr+CSrwCLNwj1qS3KPewL mEUdQIcXJnzZCo4G5Jwxz17Cd5ZCEuwfWopiPWVJmdOYikeeOv5GmlHQD YA8MkiXziUgYo75u+iY+wavsUZs6KNkfd9VZHTuhf7dLbp0RHJCCT7j62 4=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3A4NV4uxMRO5C7vMGISnkl6mtXPHoupqn0MwgJ65?= =?us-ascii?q?Eul7NJdOG58o//OFDEu60/l0fHCIPc7f8My/HbtaztQyQh2d6AqzhDFf4ETB?= =?us-ascii?q?oZkYMTlg0kDtSCDBj2Mu/sZC83NM9DT1RiuXq8NBsdFQ=3D=3D?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CrBQDWh2de/51dJa1lHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFbFggBAsqhBWDRgOKb4I6JZgVglIDVAkBAQEMAQEjCgI?= =?us-ascii?q?EAQGEQwIXgW8kOBMCAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBQRthVYMhWMBAQEBAgESEREMAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?3AQsEAgEIDgMDAQIBAgImAgICMBUFAwgCBAENBRQOgwQBgkoDDiABDp15AoE?= =?us-ascii?q?5iGJ1gTKCfwEBBYEvAQMDC0ODBhiCDAmBDiqFIYcLGoFBP4ERJwwUgk0+gmQ?= =?us-ascii?q?CAoEbEg6DOTKCLJBrn0EKgjyHU48WHYNJl2+DTYsriHySVQIEAgQFAg4BAQW?= =?us-ascii?q?BaSKBRAwIcBVlAYJBCUcYDY4dOII4gQOKVXSBKYpmEBeCGwEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,537,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="445088523" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 10 Mar 2020 12:33:59 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (xch-rcd-003.cisco.com [173.37.102.13]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02ACXx9v013578 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:33:59 GMT Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (173.37.102.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:33:59 -0500 Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:33:58 -0500 Received: from NAM12-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:33:58 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=PbFuNiEhQLGs8gDJOM3fn3ZpgkKRaG+otCtAuRu6EWMjKYlOND746MPG41vwQRhZB6bAlkH5QQTIurtnXez3xYaPi/yxg5X+nlhPWUlqfTUmKBuEq2HoLIpYCO1Jrwr5SE50WwXaLnfdvvFk6KTVVDOXs2uoZJnAav6l87enxrct+kssQ8SmRUa0YnnlBVHrLsiCPdrAsk56MOGViU75lbNyxesek6y9rQVMZX3m70gybFQS+22xzupdj/IaNiug7HhPGSlNeYLoqFP+JVPHv3UtCJ18OfeyXdmq/ALMKo4Wsx3m+S/HkxhfvT7g4qDMwKxn2EQ0i6cUlie7Ke7zOQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=lmTLiq1xGhkUbQm+J10ILrf+mg2rh0/F2E8dO3DrPfQ=; b=CV1wcK0DORNAkKM1Pmf0WCdSzTpo0yNwf8Z4nLgJExkssTNmz0QVNQNY+S5lNFIHw7fPpdE5c50rq7CA+g7hUCScwgJNnfuycBiOu+UZwVhUMd46EkxVYKSTxL/r9k5+fp5q7mxHEnvECkKls2GK527Z0rfHNbYc3SZncKJhHZJrLumKfiavRFF1bcddSMihSvciGbpqYsfG60h8fHq2Kwg/kD61qnJE5O9wAAEtDDaHZKv4THWFee975osFaulCnlVU5siNyKSwy4x+ur2QJswUVnhb3UyYn/4inJduw582Sd4oT5YM7r07O2gNqdE3ko35DCaPLewJf3yxx/SMZg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=lmTLiq1xGhkUbQm+J10ILrf+mg2rh0/F2E8dO3DrPfQ=; b=gP/wiNiKcdnpXE++G9LEDJJtaqooNaGc7Ozfcx5qwtr/CccnuhgvLE8YUB9CzOdlgZR+rVuvjdWRJyvIuYeP3BO7iswuzirFebypx4uQdxscRuDV2l2tDZ0tL/4M9nJ0b0BlBBLNi+pKmgbLGA+3ysEcUoGP3DfWMIJHO/8Oz50= Received: from DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:10d::13) by DM5PR11MB0012.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:68::36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.17; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:33:57 +0000 Received: from DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::680d:e22e:72d5:67ca]) by DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::680d:e22e:72d5:67ca%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.018; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:33:57 +0000 From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" To: Martin Thomson , The IESG CC: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: =?utf-8?B?W0lldGYtYW5kLWdpdGh1Yl0gw4lyaWMgVnluY2tlJ3MgQWJzdGFpbiBvbiBk?= =?utf-8?Q?raft-ietf-git-using-github-05:_(with_COMMENT)?= Thread-Index: AQHV9sta12ymxFsSNECL2fm9R8zGzqhBugKAgAAZfwA= Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:33:57 +0000 Message-ID: <8B3DFCDD-51EF-4141-822F-DF4BFA2C887A@cisco.com> References: <158383812185.15459.5142442277630341183@ietfa.amsl.com> <962a022c-be3e-4dba-9ed7-39c3ecbb2b17@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <962a022c-be3e-4dba-9ed7-39c3ecbb2b17@www.fastmail.com> Accept-Language: fr-BE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.22.0.200209 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=evyncke@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c1:36:6975:99c:9457:3f54] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 847fab28-60df-4f41-8726-08d7c4ef4dae x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR11MB0012: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 033857D0BD x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(136003)(376002)(346002)(366004)(39860400002)(396003)(189003)(199004)(81166006)(81156014)(186003)(53546011)(54906003)(6506007)(316002)(6486002)(110136005)(478600001)(966005)(66574012)(2906002)(33656002)(6512007)(91956017)(66946007)(71200400001)(66446008)(4326008)(66476007)(66556008)(64756008)(2616005)(5660300002)(224303003)(8936002)(36756003)(76116006)(86362001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR11MB0012; H:DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: ZfrzWJvudx5GYeCbLQ3C9DtxJZk6j+FXKgkT/2dFjWdtfBc/LVDu4CEmKj8EE/Zvo4Is0b7XuVbLfke0OIO7RTEgviQYd6qo1KFNldijjOjx59QOryZC6tG9c3EgRVLOIYj3mP7O0SAtqM8sL4y2HzyPJg5PjLEeck9xIbYAn8qG1Edu80eryKOh4DZGun/tPnqwr0uoYFYp/2Iv+p73/A== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <58730D6910A0B6428CBF333979294FD3@namprd11.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 847fab28-60df-4f41-8726-08d7c4ef4dae X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Mar 2020 12:33:57.4786 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: bQPhEA2U99tR/p1WtUZTAW/EduSgsZwxRgjRDCHUrtSFFuPlW7g2pC1aHAs1dIUtFPO/C4KCOykdx7I2t4HQQg== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR11MB0012 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.13, xch-rcd-003.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-6.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_Abstain_on_draf?= =?utf-8?q?t-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:34:08 -0000 SGVsbG8gTWFydGluLA0KDQpUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9yIHJlc3BlY3RmdWxseSB1bmRlcnN0YW5kIG15 IHJlc3BlY3RmdWwgZGlzYWdyZWVtZW50IHdpdGggdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KDQpJIHVuZGVyc3Rh bmQgdGhlIGZpbmUgbGluZSB0byBiZSBkcmF3biBiZXR3ZWVuIHRoZSB0d28gZG9jdW1lbnRzLiBO b3QgZWFzeSBpbiBnZW5lcmFsLg0KDQpGaW5hbGx5LCB0aGVyZSBpcyBhIGxpbWl0IG9mIDMgY29u dHJpYnV0b3JzIGZvciBhIHByaXZhdGUgcmVwbywgc28sIHRoaXMgd2lsbCBub3QgZmx5IGluIG1v c3QgY2FzZXMuDQoNClJlZ2FyZHMNCg0KLcOpcmljDQoNCu+7vy0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2Fn ZS0tLS0tDQpGcm9tOiBNYXJ0aW4gVGhvbXNvbiA8bXRAbG93ZW50cm9weS5uZXQ+DQpEYXRlOiBU dWVzZGF5LCAxMCBNYXJjaCAyMDIwIGF0IDEzOjAzDQpUbzogRXJpYyBWeW5ja2UgPGV2eW5ja2VA Y2lzY28uY29tPiwgVGhlIElFU0cgPGllc2dAaWV0Zi5vcmc+DQpDYzogImRyYWZ0LWlldGYtZ2l0 LXVzaW5nLWdpdGh1YkBpZXRmLm9yZyIgPGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtZ2l0LXVzaW5nLWdpdGh1YkBpZXRm Lm9yZz4sICJpZXRmLWFuZC1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5vcmciIDxpZXRmLWFuZC1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5v cmc+LCAiZ2l0LWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZyIgPGdpdC1jaGFpcnNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+DQpTdWJqZWN0 OiBSZTogW0lldGYtYW5kLWdpdGh1Yl0gw4lyaWMgVnluY2tlJ3MgQWJzdGFpbiBvbiBkcmFmdC1p ZXRmLWdpdC11c2luZy1naXRodWItMDU6ICh3aXRoIENPTU1FTlQpDQoNCiAgICBIaSDDiXJpYywN CiAgICANCiAgICBJIHVuZGVyc3RhbmQgdGhlIHJlYXNvbnMgZm9yIHlvdXIgYWJzdGVudGlvbi4g IEkgaG9wZSB0aGF0IHRoZXNlIHJlc3BvbnNlcyBoZWxwLCBldmVuIGlmIEknbSBndWVzc2luZyB0 aGF0IHRoZXkgd29uJ3QgYWRkcmVzcyB5b3VyIGNvbmNlcm5zLg0KICAgIA0KICAgIE9uIFR1ZSwg TWFyIDEwLCAyMDIwLCBhdCAyMjowMiwgw4lyaWMgVnluY2tlIHZpYSBEYXRhdHJhY2tlciB3cm90 ZToNCiAgICA+IElzIHRoZXJlIGEgcmVhc29uIHdoeSAiR2l0SHViIiBpcyB1c2VkIHJhdGhlciB0 aGFuIHNpbXBseSAiR2l0IiBvciBzaW1pbGFyDQogICAgPiBzeXN0ZW0gPyBBdCBsZWFzdCwgaXQg aXMgZXhwbGljaXQgdG8gYmUgdGhlIGNvbW1lcmNpYWwgd2ViIHNpdGUgImdpdGh1Yi5jb20iLg0K ICAgID4gQWx0ZXJuYXRpdmVzIHN1Y2ggYXMgR2l0TGFiIGFuZCBCaXRCdWNrZXQgYXJlIG9ubHkg YnJpZWZseSBtZW50aW9uZWQuDQogICAgDQogICAgQmVjYXVzZSB0aGF0IGlzIHdoYXQgcGVvcGxl IGFyZSB1c2luZy4gIEFuZCB3ZSd2ZSBzZWVuIHNpZ25pZmljYW50IHBheWJhY2sgZnJvbSB0aGF0 LiAgQm90aCBpbiB0ZXJtcyBvZiB1c2luZyBjb21tb24gLSBhbmQgdGhlcmVmb3JlIHdlbGwtbWFp bnRhaW5lZCAtIHRvb2xzIGFuZCBpbiB0ZXJtcyBvZiBhY2Nlc3NpbmcgYW4gZXhpc3RpbmcgY29t bXVuaXR5IG9mIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9ycy4NCiAgICANCiAgICBJIHBlcnNvbmFsbHkgZG8gdGhpcyBp biBmdWxsIGFwcHJlY2lhdGlvbiBmb3IgdGhlIGRyYXdiYWNrcywgYm90aCBpbiB0ZXJtcyBvZiBj ZW50cmFsaXphdGlvbiBhbmQgdGVjaG5vbG9neS4gIEZvciB0aGUgZm9ybWVyLCBnaXQgaXMgZ29v ZCBhYm91dCB0aGF0LCBhbmQgd2UndmUgYSBzdHJhdGVneSAoaW4gLWNvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24gcHJp bWFyaWx5KSBmb3IgbWl0aWdhdGluZyByaXNrcyBhc3NvY2lhdGVkIHdpdGggY2VudHJhbGl6YXRp b24uICBBcyBmb3IgSVB2NiwgSSdtIG5vdCBwcmVwYXJlZCB0byBzdGFuZCBvbiBwcmluY2lwbGUg aW4gdGhpcyBjYXNlLCBidXQgcmVzcGVjdCB0aGUgY2hvaWNlIG9mIG90aGVycyB0byBkbyBzby4N CiAgICANCiAgICBGV0lXLCB0aGUgYWx0ZXJuYXRpdmVzIGFyZSBwcmV0dHkgZ29vZCwgYW5kIG1v c3QgaGF2ZSBhbGwgb2YgdGhlIHNhbWUgY2FwYWJpbGl0aWVzIChzb21lIGFyZSBldmVuIGJldHRl ciBpbiBzb21lIHdheXMpLiAgV29ya2luZyBncm91cHMgcHJvYmFibHkgd29uJ3Qgc3VmZmVyIHRv byBiYWRseSBmb3IgYSBjaG9pY2Ugb2YgYW4gYWx0ZXJuYXRpdmUgc2VydmljZS4gIEJ1dCBmb3Ig bWUgYWNjZXNzIHRvIGEgd2lkZXIgY29tbXVuaXR5IG9mIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9ycyBpcyAtIHVuZm9y dHVuYXRlbHkgLSBhIGRldGVybWluaW5nIGZhY3Rvci4NCiAgICANCiAgICA+IEdlbmVyYWwgY29t bWVudDogaXQgYXBwZWFycyB0aGF0IHRoZSB0d28gJ2dpdCcgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGhhdmUgdmVyeSBz aW1pbGFyDQogICAgPiBjb250ZW50LiBXYXMgaXQgY29uc2lkZXJlZCB0byBiZXR0ZXIgc3BsaXQg dGhlbSBvciBtZXJnZSB0aGVtPw0KICAgIA0KICAgIFRoaXMgd2FzIGRlYmF0ZWQgYXQgc29tZSBs ZW5ndGggaW4gdGhlIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAuICBUaGlzIG9uZSB3aWxsIGVuZCB1cCBoYXZpbmcg QkNQIHN0YXR1cy4gIEkgc3VzcGVjdCB0aGF0IHRoZSBvdGhlciB3aWxsIGhhdmUgbGVzcyBsb25n LXRlcm0gdXRpbGl0eSBhcyBpdCBpcyBtb3JlIHRhY3RpY2FsLg0KICAgICANCiAgICA+IFNlY3Rp b24gMy4yOiBhIHByaXZhdGUgcmVwb3NpdG9yeSBpcyBub3QgZnJlZSBBRkFJSyB3aXRoIGdpdGh1 Yi5jb20uIFdoaWNoDQogICAgPiBwYXJ0eSB3aWxsIHBheSBmb3IgdGhvc2UgcmVwb3MgPw0KICAg IA0KICAgIFByaXZhdGUgcmVwb3NpdG9yaWVzIGFyZSBvZmZlcmVkIGZvciBmcmVlLCB3aXRoIHNv bWUgbGltaXRhdGlvbnMuICBodHRwczovL2dpdGh1Yi5ibG9nLzIwMTktMDEtMDctbmV3LXllYXIt bmV3LWdpdGh1Yi8NCiAgICANCg0K From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:34:49 2020 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 DDB543A1217; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:34:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=s/1x2t5u; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=YH4tUqWy 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 xk59Rmqqw2PB; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:34:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEB983A121F; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:34:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22C19B5; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:34:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:34:19 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=d uW7NIAL1D4AqxpGOmXOj69pJFXVG5OV7KJNbRCZwaY=; b=s/1x2t5u1KQonkjxV GEPTPfNgBRERbT++3I0yzYy/3O9LSVTfLYr17rsSw9HpbCCEItdj5Jjsgz5yPUSx 930/XI2u9fojSshd4+5rMJtMYfIU0kRvCuQrCEQtvIWWAs3hJL4aSfkn4XMgwJsm lr50qwk/aEJcIg90zlR3sduVngsGsANakWSDlfUyd36m1+cQ+kX6v90/f3n8PILu tyY56QYxKRFnzqt9gNUskdvXvGye+bzQHkhGRHto7NJ1YSVWJdFXS0w96ZJPwa+7 WQX0vVzqTIrlPrHvCKK+5HEGMInVO5DMACt2tU59eYv1wUV3/HK4Krzcb3YD+gvR LcTYA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=duW7NIAL1D4AqxpGOmXOj69pJFXVG5OV7KJNbRCZw aY=; b=YH4tUqWyQk7VLoO92Y4hptH/FXPylnvEmug+kfRu/bK37np1l7jn/dbBs 4H0zXd1gLh/wYNBqcGCGdwyIqYjvVgYlhXOioKSgrBOYOWkFXeobl4F2Wn3T0hx5 mhUa+LMjEY6GjOpMkFgoh6CDdYOL66d1oE1U2GJ3eMqcwqoUCNfv0GY/SU5MHvTC 4hnlHXnbgR4+AD0cBWkz8AyHTemaraWGTrjITfTvIcy49Fn/cATQM8pJV9+vi54f S6Nt6gu0JVMOeSAQrNRWk3EuzyBYnhxGHL9AyOpta+APUtIwWZlWZyTMywJDGSUT 11X9aWY2Upd2JO60e+cY02WmbBPnQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvtddggedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqh hmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhishhsrgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegt ohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepudejfe drfeekrdduudejrdeludenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgr ihhlfhhrohhmpegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhn X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.91]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A3CBD30614B1; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:34:17 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:34:16 -0400 Cc: IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> To: =?utf-8?Q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_an?= =?utf-8?q?d_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:34:27 -0000 Hi Mirja, > On Mar 10, 2020, at 6:30 AM, Mirja K=C3=BChlewind via Datatracker = wrote: >=20 > Mirja K=C3=BChlewind has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: Discuss >=20 > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this > introductory paragraph, however.) >=20 >=20 > Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >=20 >=20 > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ >=20 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > To be honest I don't fully understand the point of this document. It = seem like > this document is supposed to be the basis for more discussion, = however, I > thought that's what we have the wg for. So when and how do we come to = a final > decision if we want to implement the proposed changes? This document specifies the administrative processes and conventions we = will use. Further discussion of the changes (other than minor tweaks = here and there) is not expected. Best, Alissa=20 > And what would we do in > that case - take this document and republish? Why can't we make the = decision > first and then publish something? In short, I think it would be = important that > the document also describes what the next steps are and the triggers = to move on! >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Other questions/comments: >=20 > 1) Sec 2.3: > "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personnel = changes." > Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this sentence = really > unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or = GitHub) and > what is should do? >=20 > 2) Sec 2.5: > "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" > This section indicated that also individual drafts could be maintained = within > the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or = desirable: > Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which not? = There > can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >=20 > 3) Also sec 2.5: > " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a > facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of = an > ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new > repository within that organization for a single document." > For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit it = to the > datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does not = seems > too useful... >=20 > 4) Sec 2.6: > "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." > Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you can = add link to > external pages? >=20 >=20 >=20 From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:36:07 2020 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 C1DD03A1219 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:36:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 JV0ovmZ22QSf for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:36:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 D39143A122B for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:35:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122331.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02ACYHaN021127; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:35:45 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=dLZXdGOS+xLFAT+snyH7B3AmJXBER6rRIX6ED9dYl0U=; b=PyrWwcBIzcGKVsc20+cTDXy52VYGYs0T7/+a1jqH+bMB8LSfg4O6r3DsV2PZT9DSmjS8 08czbirsv1DrxjZ8UWAnh10iENpcQ3nTVd7w0sFARjhmWysCuPPhxhWIzLnD5u6P1H5u BdLXkiGfd/kgfXm4y5LUONH/d2Hgx/Qtz/aZcha2CpsG8n1oqF/Z46vlUC8yf2G6jj57 snlB+oOpTPDionpkRlxCNAwNnzavPZ71pbVobTbsSgwHzPB/4sVU8wS0Xte+JGW2QYDs /QSOYFJ6tiD80mOEGXke89dSEAJlLXrL0084K2Z/fNSZIkBehVhl+HlrCZYq6rtuwRwx Rg== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint3 (prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com [96.6.114.86] (may be forged)) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ym1c0m0p1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:35:45 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02ACWVi4022406; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:35:45 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.32]) by prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ym7u2nryw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:35:44 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:35:43 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:35:43 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Alexandre Petrescu , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV9tbIDqz06qkDcU+tGqpZOzMSLqhBwyUA Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:35:42 +0000 Message-ID: <43209E7C-F145-40EF-A67D-5F1B30537BE2@akamai.com> References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> <8df960e1-8ddc-5092-30ac-8fceb6ea4b29@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8df960e1-8ddc-5092-30ac-8fceb6ea4b29@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.113.213] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <234ECD9C000AD44B9E6A8DE67E2E0237@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-10_06:2020-03-10, 2020-03-10 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=765 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002050000 definitions=main-2003100084 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-10_06:2020-03-10, 2020-03-10 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=730 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1011 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2003100084 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:36:05 -0000 PiAgICBUaGVyZSB3YXMgYSBsaXN0IG9mIHByb3RvY29scyBwZW9wbGUgdXNlIGF0IElFVEYuICBT b21lIG9mIHRoZW0gd2VyZSANCiAgICBJUHY2IGVuYWJsZWQuICBBIGZldyBhcmUgSVB2NCBvbmx5 LCBhbmQgY3JpdGljYWwgKEJDUD8pIG5vdyg/KS4NCiAgDQpJIGRvbid0IHVuZGVyc3RhbmQgdGhl IHBvaW50IHlvdSBhcmUgdHJ5aW5nIHRvIG1ha2UuDQogIA0KPiAgICBJZiBvbmUgbWFkZSB0aGlz IElORk9STUFUSU9OQUwgdGhlbiB0aGVyZSB3b3VsZCBiZSBsZXNzIHdvcnJ5Pw0KICANCk5vLiAg VGhhdCBkZWZlYXRzIHRoZSB3aG9sZSBwdXJwb3NlLiBNYW55IElFVEZlcnMgdXNlIGdpdGh1YiBp bmNsdWRpbmcgc29tZSB2ZXJ5ICJpbXBvcnRhbnQiIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXBzLiAgSXQgaXMgdmVy eSBtdWNoIHdvcnRod2hpbGUgaGF2aW5nIGJlc3QgcHJhY3RpY2VzIHNvIHRoYXQgbW9yZSBlZmZl Y3RpdmUgY29sbGFib3JhdGlvbiBpcyBwb3NzaWJsZS4gIEV2ZW4gc29tZXRoaW5nIGFzIHNpbXBs ZSBhcyBuYW1pbmcgeW91ciBwcm9qZWN0IGlldGYtd2ctWFhYWCBoZWxwcy4gDQoNCg0K From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:46:34 2020 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 BE0B73A124C; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:46:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind_via_Datatracker?= To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind?= Message-ID: <158384439069.15427.16653271470255787018@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:46:30 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objectio?= =?utf-8?q?n_on_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:46:31 -0000 Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for this well-written and helpful document. I have a couple of issue below that touch on the use of normative language and relation to RFC2418 (as well as maybe RFC2026). I guess those could qualify as discuss but I leave them as comments for now trusting in the editors and AD to address them appropriately. One general comment: I don't really understand the relationship between this document and draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration. There is a lot of direct overlap especially in section 2 but also in other sections. I understand that this document is BCP and such more appropriate to specify practices normatively but I don't really see why draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration is still needed then. The only part that is left to draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration are ideas about how things could be integrated in the datatracker and with the secretariat. As I say in my discuss ballot for that draft, it is not clear to my why we need an RFC for that at this point of time. If no decision is made yet, this could have also just be integrated e.g. into the appendix on this draft (or even partially in the security considerations section). Other comments/questions: 1) Sec 3.2 "...or they might create repositories for individual documents on request." I made a similar comment in my ballot for draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration. I think creating repos for individuals document is maybe not always the best option. I assume the intention here to not out-rule any cases where this might be okay (e.g. if a document is expectd to be adopted soon), however, I would rather prefer to see a recommendation to usually not do that as there can be many individual drafts in the groups and it can provide a wrong signal if repos are created for some and not others. 2) Sec 4.1.3: " Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consensus MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented." I do understand the intention here as it is important to make process, however, inline with the rest of the document and the general idea that practises can vary from group to group, I think this really should be a SHOULD NOT only. Also further "Resolved issues MUST remain closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue." I find this actually a bit strange because it should also then say something like "Resolved issues MUST only be closed with wg consensus"... I guess the word "resolved" is important here but why would you re-open an issue at all if it is resolved? I guess the case is that the wg figures that the issue is not resolved yet. Is the recommendation here for a wg participant to open a new issue if he/she thinks an issue is not fully resolved yet (rather than just re-open)? If so, you should say that. 3) Sec 4.2: " Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather than committing directly to the "master" branch of the repository." I think this does not align well with how we work today (without GitHub). E.g. if a group decides to use GitHub to better track changes and maybe easily integrate editorial comments, but decide to have all discussion on the mailing list (and not use github issues), I think it would be fully okay for the editors just commit directly based on the consensus on the mailing list. So I think the important part is that substantial comments should only be committed with wg consensus and therefore it is a good practice to have pull requests first to declare consensus based on the concrete proposed edits. However, if a different way to declare consensus is used that's fine as well. In short, I think the SHOULD is to string here for the general case. 4) Sec 5.3 (mostly editorial): "It is possible to use different processes for different documents in the Working Group. Working Group chairs SHOULD confirm that the Working Group has consensus to adopt any process. In particular, the introduction of a more tightly-controlled process can have the effect of privileging positions already captured in documents, which might disadvantage alternative viewpoints." This text seems to apply more general to all content in section 5 and should maybe be moved out of section 5.3. Similarly I'm not sure if section 5.3.1 and 5.3.2 should actually be subsection of 5.3. The question of which issue to track seem rather orthogonal to the question who resolves the issue (I agree that this discussion does not make sense when no issue are tracked like in sec 5.1 but it could make sense for the mode in section 5.2) 5) Sec 5.3.1: "The risk is that design changes might not always reflect the consensus of the Working Group." I know that happens, even without GitHub, but should ideally not be the case. However, I think the root cause is rather that changes were incorrectly not identified by the editors as requiring consensus. Maybe this can be reworded accordingly to not give the impression that it is okay to implement design changes in a working group without consensus. Actually this is a broader problem (independent of GitHub) because some editors, especially when they also have been the authors of the individual draft, often implement design changes first in a new version and then ask the working group for consensus. As I said that's a different issue but it could be good to mention that GitHub and the use of PRs can actually help to not use this practice but always each consensus first. 6) Sec 5.3.1: "... it is likely appropriate to move to a more tightly controlled process." Maybe add something like "e.g. potentially during or after after working group last call". I think in many groups (that do not use GitHub) it is very common practice that editors have full control about the document. I mean I guess that's their role. I think GitHub really can help to make the process more transparent but it should not be a requirement. Especially shorter documents that had have good consensus form the beginning, there might necessarily be a need to every change that process. (I would say QUIC is rather the other extreme.) 7) Sec 5.3.2: " Chairs might choose to manage the process of deciding which issues are substantive. For instance, chairs might reserve the ability to use the "design" label to new issues (see Section 5.4.1) and to close issues marked as "design". Chairs should always allow document editors to identify and address editorial issues as they see fit." I guess you could also use normative language here: "MAY choose to" and "Chairs SHOULD always allow" 8) Sec 5.3.2: " As documents mature further, explicit confirmation of technical decisions with the Working Group mailing list becomes more important." Not sure I agree here. I know what you mean but explicit confirmation on the mailing list is always important. Maybe there is a way to rephrase that (or just remove that sentence...?) 9) Sec 5.3.2: " Gaining Working Group consensus about the resolution of issues can be done in the abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the outcome of discussions as they see fit." I'm actually not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify? 10) Sec 5.3.2: " WGLC SHOULD be proposed as pull requests, and MUST be discussed on the mailing list, and MUST have chairs explicitly confirm consensus." I agree with the "MUST be discussed on the mailing list" (as this is inline with RFC2418 e.g. 3.2 but therefore doesn't necessarily need to be normative in this doc) but find the other two SHOULD and MUST too strict. I don't think this is aligned with the process we have today in groups and we should not use this document to make the process more strict than it is. Especially I'm not sure what "chairs MUST explicitly confirm consensus" really means and it seems to be a requirement independent of GitHub and therefore eventually would even update RFC2481. 11) Sec 5.4.4: It might be too late for this kind of input, however, as I review the document I'll note it here anyway. In taps we also have a "discuss" label to mark issue that has been discussed but need further discussion e.g. at an (interim) meeting. For this, one could even create a milestone to indicate at which meeting more discussion should take place (or when e.g. a document is text-ready until when text should be provided). We/the editors also did this for a while in taps. 12) Section 6 seems to encourage revision only in preparation for meetings. I'm not sure if that is inline with our usual working practice. I mean yes in reality we see the draft submission deadline as forcing function for updates and there want to keep it but we also do encourage to rev documents more often and work continuously, e.g. when a mayor change was implemented or a mayor issue resolved. And yes this works probably better for smaller documents but the section seems a bit contradicting to this practice. I mean the reason that we see many updates just at the draft deadline is because editors assign time to make updates to resolve issue to match the deadline. If editors make continuous changes we should encourage to update more often. Maybe it could rather say something like: "Revisions SHOULD be submitted as I-Ds when a signification issue has been resolved. Editors MAY bundle multiple changes in one revision if updates are done in timely close coherence and SHOULD update at least two weeks before any meeting." However, some of this advise is actually not GitHub specific and might again just touch our general guidelines and as such update RFC2026 and RFC2418... 13) sec 7: " Chairs MUST consider input from all discussion venues when assessing consensus including GitHub, mailing lists, interim meetings, and IETF meetings." This seems like an update to RFC2481 again... as maybe also some other notes in this section. From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:51:44 2020 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 48C893A1265; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:51:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 xGI0Ic2tTm6M; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:51:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (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 0C22D3A125A; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:51:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p200300dee7239a00dc45195030af2769.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e723:9a00:dc45:1950:30af:2769]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1jBeM8-0007G0-NH; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:51:32 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) From: Mirja Kuehlewind In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:51:31 +0100 Cc: IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Alissa Cooper X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1583844696;0c8ae60d; X-HE-SMSGID: 1jBeM8-0007G0-NH Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_an?= =?utf-8?q?d_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:51:39 -0000 Hi Alissa, This is not what the document says here (and also in the abstract): " The document is meant to spur discussion in the IETF community. If there proves to be rough consensus in the community in support of the proposals in this document, the functional requirements would need to be discussed with the IETF Tools Team and the IETF Secretariat, who would need to support various pieces of what is proposed herein.=E2=80=9D= Or should this have been removed?=20 Is the intention to let the secretariat provide these function on = publication? If so, we should probably request changes to the tool team = before publication=E2=80=A6? Maybe it is more appropriate to not discuss the tooling issue and = concrete datatracker change in the RFC-to-be but only document the = process as to be performed by the chairs and secretariat? Mirja > On 10. Mar 2020, at 13:34, Alissa Cooper wrote: >=20 > Hi Mirja, >=20 >> On Mar 10, 2020, at 6:30 AM, Mirja K=C3=BChlewind via Datatracker = wrote: >>=20 >> Mirja K=C3=BChlewind has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: Discuss >>=20 >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this >> introductory paragraph, however.) >>=20 >>=20 >> Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>=20 >>=20 >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> DISCUSS: >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> To be honest I don't fully understand the point of this document. It = seem like >> this document is supposed to be the basis for more discussion, = however, I >> thought that's what we have the wg for. So when and how do we come to = a final >> decision if we want to implement the proposed changes? >=20 > This document specifies the administrative processes and conventions = we will use. Further discussion of the changes (other than minor tweaks = here and there) is not expected. >=20 > Best, > Alissa=20 >=20 >> And what would we do in >> that case - take this document and republish? Why can't we make the = decision >> first and then publish something? In short, I think it would be = important that >> the document also describes what the next steps are and the triggers = to move on! >>=20 >>=20 >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> Other questions/comments: >>=20 >> 1) Sec 2.3: >> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personnel = changes." >> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this = sentence really >> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or = GitHub) and >> what is should do? >>=20 >> 2) Sec 2.5: >> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" >> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be = maintained within >> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or = desirable: >> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There >> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >>=20 >> 3) Also sec 2.5: >> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a >> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of = an >> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new >> repository within that organization for a single document." >> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit it = to the >> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does = not seems >> too useful... >>=20 >> 4) Sec 2.6: >> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." >> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you can = add link to >> external pages? >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 From nobody Tue Mar 10 05:55:15 2020 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 E9A233A1294; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:55:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=05XgTdZw; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=2lgIRqHQ 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 hsgV6OBlaF6G; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03AB53A1288; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 05:55:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F26E996; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:55:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:55:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=C zd6ifNm97TFKG6mxISNttm1+/vHb3Gx3mnXCYixcQc=; b=05XgTdZwsb98XKDth dp2EMLyZhPaasvowz9QpL8FHx2MtH6UyYPl7Dp+D9MVNMeM/rJ0RQxCt8HpupVTd sIRf2vxONsGLDusvM1wsXuwFDZoX80xiEfdQv8Oh5T01ZL8kChL3n+CyR/BS/h5n pY/KpMSiCDNslzuKxS9Yl//GbhHswsPjq2B/TwInD2SO77/5X0eLHRWKRlAJaKp1 dSo7Bsojep6FpETKYck9MnFXYpd/zMNruNel3hAsyIkMHE74Nm5GL30QOWlW9sWs tQUUgRl/iQW383rQylrzzlrGGqDE9KMmEH8aUZx/wOa3FBq68IYCZoqZ6WS2idMs IgVSA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Czd6ifNm97TFKG6mxISNttm1+/vHb3Gx3mnXCYixc Qc=; b=2lgIRqHQAZIA42f6Uo+I4qTgmY43T1AIsq/afm3o0x2tW81oek09qws8U q9gHRFdnhAEFIVcX/HKJH/fvWUFYFt4ZmcWBokC9DdE6FfMbBtSb9FJliw/VXjMq Q84d45MlAf6dgIaQBc8VAjuVVluZ6XVEiDZxJUhAKay4/cJNkDW15KVuByEQGxHf 1zebo4wIKiNRrIkjP1Uvw5EsBzWWNLwnUhZEZe3L1bDZMGVjltoJy06WWtfMDmMm NlCIMiwFpj0mCF4dCMMPFdb9kEEp/HC6264r9AxdTd6om9TEVOoli1z4hhTMa7TW LAtWRms3VMnx4ZTwhEVDqPgrNfDRQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvtddggeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqh hmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhishhsrgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegt ohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepudejfe drfeekrdduudejrdeludenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgr ihhlfhhrohhmpegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhn X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.91]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B7FF73061363; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:55:08 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:55:07 -0400 Cc: IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Mirja Kuehlewind X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_an?= =?utf-8?q?d_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 12:55:13 -0000 > On Mar 10, 2020, at 8:51 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind = wrote: >=20 > Hi Alissa, >=20 > This is not what the document says here (and also in the abstract): >=20 > " The document is meant to spur discussion in the IETF community. = If > there proves to be rough consensus in the community in support of = the > proposals in this document, the functional requirements would need = to > be discussed with the IETF Tools Team and the IETF Secretariat, who > would need to support various pieces of what is proposed herein.=E2=80= =9D >=20 > Or should this have been removed?=20 Yes, sorry for not catching that. I think we can just remove this. >=20 > Is the intention to let the secretariat provide these function on = publication? If so, we should probably request changes to the tool team = before publication=E2=80=A6? Yep, the tools team is already working on this and the secretariat is = aware. Thanks, Alissa >=20 > Maybe it is more appropriate to not discuss the tooling issue and = concrete datatracker change in the RFC-to-be but only document the = process as to be performed by the chairs and secretariat? >=20 > Mirja >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On 10. Mar 2020, at 13:34, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>=20 >> Hi Mirja, >>=20 >>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 6:30 AM, Mirja K=C3=BChlewind via Datatracker = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Mirja K=C3=BChlewind has entered the following ballot position for >>> draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: Discuss >>>=20 >>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to = all >>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this >>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >>> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> DISCUSS: >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>=20 >>> To be honest I don't fully understand the point of this document. It = seem like >>> this document is supposed to be the basis for more discussion, = however, I >>> thought that's what we have the wg for. So when and how do we come = to a final >>> decision if we want to implement the proposed changes? >>=20 >> This document specifies the administrative processes and conventions = we will use. Further discussion of the changes (other than minor tweaks = here and there) is not expected. >>=20 >> Best, >> Alissa=20 >>=20 >>> And what would we do in >>> that case - take this document and republish? Why can't we make the = decision >>> first and then publish something? In short, I think it would be = important that >>> the document also describes what the next steps are and the triggers = to move on! >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> COMMENT: >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>=20 >>> Other questions/comments: >>>=20 >>> 1) Sec 2.3: >>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personnel = changes." >>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this = sentence really >>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or = GitHub) and >>> what is should do? >>>=20 >>> 2) Sec 2.5: >>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" >>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be = maintained within >>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or = desirable: >>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There >>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >>>=20 >>> 3) Also sec 2.5: >>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a >>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of = an >>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new >>> repository within that organization for a single document." >>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit it = to the >>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does = not seems >>> too useful... >>>=20 >>> 4) Sec 2.6: >>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." >>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you can = add link to >>> external pages? >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 From nobody Tue Mar 10 06:01:03 2020 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 209383A12A1; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:01:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 5fRuV4PQLowT; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:00:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (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 667F43A129F; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:00:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p200300dee7239a00dc45195030af2769.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e723:9a00:dc45:1950:30af:2769]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1jBeVF-0000Tb-Qk; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:00:57 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) From: Mirja Kuehlewind In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:00:57 +0100 Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, IESG , draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <91791C0B-D5BC-4030-A1C2-C0409EA940AC@kuehlewind.net> References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Alissa Cooper X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1583845259;fbb658e7; X-HE-SMSGID: 1jBeVF-0000Tb-Qk Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_an?= =?utf-8?q?d_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 13:01:01 -0000 Okay, thanks for clarifying this. However this status and intention is = not well reflected in the current text in the document and I think a = revision is needed to avoid confusion. It's not only the paragraph below = but also other parts, especially where it talks about options to ingrate = in the datatracker. Also if this document is meant document the practice as to be applied, = it should also be BCP and use normatively language. But then probably = most of the text in draft-ietf-git-using-github in section 2 (and some = of section 3) could be moved into this document because otherwise we = will end up having this specified normatively twice. Mirja > On 10. Mar 2020, at 13:55, Alissa Cooper wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Mar 10, 2020, at 8:51 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind = wrote: >>=20 >> Hi Alissa, >>=20 >> This is not what the document says here (and also in the abstract): >>=20 >> " The document is meant to spur discussion in the IETF community. = If >> there proves to be rough consensus in the community in support of = the >> proposals in this document, the functional requirements would need = to >> be discussed with the IETF Tools Team and the IETF Secretariat, who >> would need to support various pieces of what is proposed herein.=E2=80= =9D >>=20 >> Or should this have been removed?=20 >=20 > Yes, sorry for not catching that. I think we can just remove this. >=20 >>=20 >> Is the intention to let the secretariat provide these function on = publication? If so, we should probably request changes to the tool team = before publication=E2=80=A6? >=20 > Yep, the tools team is already working on this and the secretariat is = aware. >=20 > Thanks, > Alissa >=20 >>=20 >> Maybe it is more appropriate to not discuss the tooling issue and = concrete datatracker change in the RFC-to-be but only document the = process as to be performed by the chairs and secretariat? >>=20 >> Mirja >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> On 10. Mar 2020, at 13:34, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>>=20 >>> Hi Mirja, >>>=20 >>>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 6:30 AM, Mirja K=C3=BChlewind via Datatracker = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Mirja K=C3=BChlewind has entered the following ballot position for >>>> draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: Discuss >>>>=20 >>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to = all >>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this >>>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >>>> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> DISCUSS: >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>=20 >>>> To be honest I don't fully understand the point of this document. = It seem like >>>> this document is supposed to be the basis for more discussion, = however, I >>>> thought that's what we have the wg for. So when and how do we come = to a final >>>> decision if we want to implement the proposed changes? >>>=20 >>> This document specifies the administrative processes and conventions = we will use. Further discussion of the changes (other than minor tweaks = here and there) is not expected. >>>=20 >>> Best, >>> Alissa=20 >>>=20 >>>> And what would we do in >>>> that case - take this document and republish? Why can't we make the = decision >>>> first and then publish something? In short, I think it would be = important that >>>> the document also describes what the next steps are and the = triggers to move on! >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> COMMENT: >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>=20 >>>> Other questions/comments: >>>>=20 >>>> 1) Sec 2.3: >>>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personnel = changes." >>>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this = sentence really >>>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or = GitHub) and >>>> what is should do? >>>>=20 >>>> 2) Sec 2.5: >>>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" >>>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be = maintained within >>>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or = desirable: >>>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There >>>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >>>>=20 >>>> 3) Also sec 2.5: >>>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a >>>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of = an >>>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new >>>> repository within that organization for a single document." >>>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit = it to the >>>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does = not seems >>>> too useful... >>>>=20 >>>> 4) Sec 2.6: >>>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." >>>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you can = add link to >>>> external pages? >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 From nobody Tue Mar 10 06:01:12 2020 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 E9E6B3A129D for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:01:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.112 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.112 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.463, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 3TUC-H-c9-5F for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:01:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-f51.google.com (mail-io1-f51.google.com [209.85.166.51]) (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 A00933A12ED for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:01:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f51.google.com with SMTP id h8so12646900iob.2 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:01:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SRzUTnZNM0t/5ibP2TmnjbE7P7lSXU7wOw9AUt8hG9A=; b=CL3RtgmrEyYwZhPlGuvdaVSPRG5uRAFVcjFliH50XfRRRrHdXUl7jMxVcmEp4XPq+x RgFVXkhXwFYcPtI28t5j4e0D9mWeoZXlXRDXr/M6Hi+iTTODBtNJ9MC4bCBivOTrq/e2 DgF2zdFyhV7Sw5dmuXOUOROv35yQW8OMaj3p0rwIa9qYMbne907z0M9sG9+Zf/V7X0Co 8NIcrxly7zYEcZ5KOREg6xqOv+UEtW0lEOoDoeU+MwGNGHi2OipHN30xZXIVcAU5Ebj7 Dolna4n0XPRix4+o9BeNVUcyGER33dl8Sb/gWOy74RVQCBh2GSnHKfUGu9qvAgONxo2l cAXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0014qlBT+d9ccl74QlsgtRMiqAr7t2wKRSzxvCmklLrAah2mJg 9KMrSsTDf5GHp6vpuwys+htjSoTQhgQwx4UyWfhJQw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsG+oUyljDwBGIb2kzhnKfJVpnAz0UqA778osi8+6CgkU7OFlIW+zED+VCzDFcuDY5rlBg9VTLBkZYt3fJqo3s= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:a9b:: with SMTP id 27mr20026616jas.70.1583845267518; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:01:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Barry Leiba Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:00:55 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Salz, Rich" Cc: Martin Thomson , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 13:01:11 -0000 > My only take-away is "what, again with the IPv4 thing?" but if that's the= price of clearing a DISCUSS oh well. There's no DISCUSS on the IPv4 thing. My non-blocking (very non-blocking) comment was "why mention v4 at all?", and =C3=89rik abstained, not DISCUSSed. b From nobody Tue Mar 10 06:02:12 2020 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 1E2D33A12A3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.111 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.111 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.463, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 5kEKfEyUbTAs; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-f42.google.com (mail-io1-f42.google.com [209.85.166.42]) (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 3BFD03A129F; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f42.google.com with SMTP id n21so12604711ioo.10; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ng+DXGzw07pMDxImlCAvftGX8o4pCvNYnQy15u4na7s=; b=Kis6JvQ8CEZKuRhX0/SXHdCP5Kx6IyCz79zsRd+Xj2D9xByZkuNF7DRKkUaVuibYMP CG3aJO94mbNGsSRDc1/2a5Ap0qD/quGJ2XKYKXHnXZ9u5GBY+cTvBigGCEPgWd3s6xIm dWDROUTbqdd+PphoOxl87Mun8N85G8dhOr5dtYg67kh4CF5VGQU8FU/VXmqvyvXjUcVF YvmbrTn29dlLby0Q3y4VIxQY/u+DBB8P5TsswbqiPA3+GNus4qxidanxul9YZjUDd9fc UD1vghx8vQy7SyMMQItYYepr/AKuIL0A8Wkze0CqmzQdnDwifW3z5Q6htZm55pJpNZmm GDWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3L5UOf73VOptDobdhwvs5uGUaCzdmsIWIbOg5S7hv2cQqC26B6 3p3MhEvfAf9tngklW8zFdwMVEwRRIGSADM57myE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtpg9IBOSQyHxW8ClphfNISUXkY/1ZFzoIL+h0oitWIJNw+jpzTir8kUJdpjbjfVYg4WEbfbcCZIGtf+Gjs6lk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:2b6:: with SMTP id d22mr20180722jaq.59.1583845324174; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Barry Leiba Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:01:53 -0400 Message-ID: To: Martin Thomson Cc: The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 13:02:07 -0000 Thanks for the response, Martin. All good, and I'm going to go shift the ballot to YES, knowing that the right thing is happening. b On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 1:33 AM Martin Thomson wrote: > > Hi Barry, > > Thanks for reviewing. Your PR is https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-git= hub/pull/43 > > Working group, please take a look at some of these changes; I think that = they are consistent with the existing intent, but they are substantive chan= ges. I've added *** in this email for those who want to see just the propo= sed new text. > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 17:44, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote: > > Chairs need to assess whether the > > arguments offered represent new information or not. This can requir= e > > some discussion to determine accurately. Resolved issues MUST remain > > closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue. > > > > There seems to be an inconsistency here: WGCs decide whether new inform= ation > > has been given, so it would seem that it=E2=80=99s the WGCs who decide = that an issue > > should be reopened. But then we say there has to be consensus for it. = In > > addition to that appearing inconsistent, I=E2=80=99m not clear how one = would determine > > whether there=E2=80=99s rough consensus to reopen an issue, if doing so= were > > controversial. > > The lens of fresh perspective is wonderful. I totally see your concern n= ow. > > That said, I think that this is good advice still, because it creates a s= tatus quo bias in a good way: resolved issues stay resolved unless the WG r= eaches consensus that there is a need for a change. For a contentious issu= e, it might be that there is no desire to relitigate the subject and then n= othing > > My original intent here was to advise against relitigation of difficult i= ssues. It is often the case that Working Groups revisit decisions over tim= e, but using an issue tracker creates an artifact that allows us to say "no= , we decided X" and therefore avoid having the same debate over and over. = For reference, that text is: > > > Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consensus = MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented. > > The last sentence here is just a (bad) repetition of the introductory sen= tence of the section. I want to remove that, but then beef this up a littl= e. > > ********* > > For long-running work items, new contributors often raise issues that h= ave already been resolved. Determining whether an issue requires re-evaluat= ion might require some discussion in the Working Group. Where there was rou= gh > consensus regarding the resolution of a contentious issue, there could be= a temptation to restart a debate. > > > > Chairs are empowered to exercise discretion in determining whether to r= eopen issues. For more difficult matters, the chairs MAY insist that the W= orking Group reach consensus on whether new an issue should be reopened. N= ote however that any product of this process still needs to have the suppor= t of rough consensus in the Working Group, which could justify reopening is= sues. > > The crux of this is that we do empower chairs to guide debate and dictate= process (see Section 6.1 of BCP 25). The advice about consensus to reopen= remains, but at a lesser strength (it's advice). And then there is a remi= nder that failure to address a real problem can lead to failure of the over= all process; if you fail to address a problem, maybe WGLC fails. > > > Idle question: Would it make sense for this document to formally update= 2418? > > The current plan is to add this to BCP 25; there should be a note to the = editor to that effect. I think that is the right way to do this. Nothing = in here *changes* 2418. But it does add to it. > > > Why mention v4 only? Does such mention have archival value once github > > supports v6? > > Because people apparently love that subject. I will remove the albeit. > > > Please use the boilerplate directly from 8174: it was debated and worde= d as it > > is intentionally. (That said, this is not a blocking comment.) > > Hah, I thought that I had managed to remove that variant from all of my d= rafts :) And no one else complained... > > > Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for > > anything more than managing drafts. > > > > I=E2=80=99m not objecting to this, but... why? If the WGCs may decide = to use github > > for drafts without involving the ADs, why can=E2=80=99t they also decid= e to use it for > > charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs? > > You know, I think that is how it has always been. I think that if we're = going to the trouble of publishing an RFC on this topic, it's probably OK t= o soften it. I'm going to propose two changes: SHOULD, and limiting this t= o the most extreme modes: > > ************ > > Chairs SHOULD involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub, esp= ecially where substantive discussion of issues is permitted as described in= {{mode-discuss}}. > > Where that reference is to the section entitled "Issue Discussion Mode". From nobody Tue Mar 10 06:02:42 2020 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 3D80A3A129E for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 LJfQopT-hfV7 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 12A933A0E85 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050096.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02ACwR9Z022763; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:02:39 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=H1ow4VD/0/cXHvNV1sBfPqzcZZYanBH5x1rAxcJBsUg=; b=XL72V/SJoQPKK8z3NNZoITTiOg4AJfG6LxDWNtRgHFshHax6+z4brXR3GUYaNRYkjiNL 5EOo3/4gGG6LutkwrA1ebvsuANGTANkW2+mpEedJrpXsDAwE6J0KQjkhVGNzqsi3cpSk y7EUuGHF/8uuQrXobZdpk/kjKIjKPnj9WvKv1ScPUPKX0mrBaEkOqSD0U93AFVKjf/Nm 637c085j+F/W4XChxTAqzaplFOL89rCv01CGWDipA4nVnRO9F8jin2a8pgcPUJbKOm9T lLmXaGQR/dXV2V556EhplNCk5on+BSkV6+KbI/0MzpqMG2BJyksGkSV/9191HGg4+Nqx eg== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2ym4wem5u7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:02:38 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02AClNLH006379; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:37 -0700 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.31]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ymafbjeq6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:02:37 -0700 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 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:02:36 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:02:36 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Barry Leiba CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV9tv6RNcos59Y4UC74dkdjGuBEKhByp2A Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:02:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.113.213] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-10_06:2020-03-10, 2020-03-10 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=706 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002050000 definitions=main-2003100086 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-10_06:2020-03-10, 2020-03-10 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=680 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2003100087 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 13:02:41 -0000 DQo+ICAgIFRoZXJlJ3Mgbm8gRElTQ1VTUyBvbiB0aGUgSVB2NCB0aGluZy4NCg0KTXkgbWlzdGFr ZTsgdGhhbmtzIGZvciB0aGUgY29ycmVjdGlvbi4NCiANCg0K From nobody Tue Mar 10 06:05:41 2020 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 6755D3A1305; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:05:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Barry Leiba Message-ID: <158384553133.16615.11059440188197778998@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:05:31 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Yes on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 13:05:38 -0000 Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Martin has an update in the works, under review by the WG, which resolves my former DISCUSS and my comments, all below. Thanks! Reminder: include a note that this document will be added to BCP 25. — Section 1.2 — GitHub is freely accessible on the open Internet, albeit currently only via IPv4. Why mention v4 only? Does such mention have archival value once github supports v6? GitHub provides a simplified and integrated interface to not only git, but also provides basic user management, an issue tracker, This doesn’t really work as written; I suggest this: NEW GitHub provides a simplified and integrated interface to git, and also provides basic user management, an issue tracker, END along with other improvements that come from broader participation by facilitating those in the community to participate. Participation/participate feels odd. Maybe, “along with other improvements that come from facilitating participation by a broader community.” ? — Section 1.5 — Please use the boilerplate directly from 8174: it was debated and worded as it is intentionally. (That said, this is not a blocking comment.) — Section 3 — Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for anything more than managing drafts. I’m not objecting to this, but... why? If the WGCs may decide to use github for drafts without involving the ADs, why can’t they also decide to use it for charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs? — Section 4.1.3 — Chairs need to assess whether the arguments offered represent new information or not. This can require some discussion to determine accurately. Resolved issues MUST remain closed unless there is consensus to reopen an issue. There seems to be an inconsistency here: WGCs decide whether new information has been given, so it would seem that it’s the WGCs who decide that an issue should be reopened. But then we say there has to be consensus for it. In addition to that appearing inconsistent, I’m not clear how one would determine whether there’s rough consensus to reopen an issue, if doing so were controversial. — Section 4.2 — Pull requests are the GitHub feature that allow users to request changes to a repository. There’s a number agreement issue here (“feature” and “allow”). I would fix this by making it all singular, so the sentence doesn’t sound strange: NEW A pull request is a GitHub feature that allows a user to request a change to a repository. END — Section 4.2.1 — In addition to the features that pull requests share with issues, users can also review the changes in a pull request. This is a valuable feature, but it has some issues. You use “issues” here in two different senses; I suggest reserving the word for referring to github “issues”, and using a different word for “but it has some issues.” Maybe, “but it presents some challenges.” — Section 5.3.1 — Finally, process checkpoints like Working Group Last Call (WGLC; Section 7.4 of [RFC2418]) provides additional safeguards Number agreement: “Finally, process checkpoints, such as Working Group Last Call (WGLC; Section 7.4 of [RFC2418]), provide additional safeguards”. — Section 6 — During the development of a document, individual revisions of a document can be built and formally submitted as an Internet-Draft. Nit: two indefinite articles feels odd; I would make it, “individual revisions of the document”. From nobody Tue Mar 10 06:40:17 2020 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 2ED443A12E2 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:40:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.668 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ukieEwu6eSQa for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.148]) (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 BAFAC3A12DB for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 06:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ADeAtO005708; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:40:10 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 026172028E0; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:40:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6FB6204EDC; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:40:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02ADe9Zm024902; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:40:09 +0100 To: "Salz, Rich" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" References: <158373628775.6803.5939811625934781990@ietfa.amsl.com> <8df960e1-8ddc-5092-30ac-8fceb6ea4b29@gmail.com> <43209E7C-F145-40EF-A67D-5F1B30537BE2@akamai.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <3908f68e-643e-4d61-2918-874ef1c420e9@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:40:09 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <43209E7C-F145-40EF-A67D-5F1B30537BE2@akamai.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 13:40:15 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 13:35, Salz, Rich a écrit : >> There was a list of protocols people use at IETF. Some of them >> were > IPv6 enabled. A few are IPv4 only, and critical (BCP?) now(?). > > I don't understand the point you are trying to make. I wish the following: github on IPv6, draft on BCP. I do not wish the following: github on IPv4-only and draft on BCP. >> If one made this INFORMATIONAL then there would be less worry? > > No. That defeats the whole purpose. Many IETFers use github > including some very "important" working groups. It is very much > worthwhile having best practices so that more effective collaboration > is possible. Even something as simple as naming your project > ietf-wg-XXXX helps. I agree. Alex From nobody Tue Mar 10 07:36:41 2020 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 59EB93A1465 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:36:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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=gmx.net 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 GMTXQX0t3uEC for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (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 6705E3A144A for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:36:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1583850987; bh=QJRGem605yTQjeeyuYNaxgovnVGcnw/NGhMFnI2RRyA=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=gh0v/J+CJ5UT9uz8Vkj4QcZK4LKplNIVlEA+tso5I5g7pgBoXQJUZuDuUzP12ctKH OF0xqCqeBXQM100d9p0VMkfoTaIRxRDYzZJkXeFd6/0IsVKpsgxTi5cI8vsakkNvl3 3HfZceLswzbMsx0o67YKNKKZ++vucMq3mi2rtJAM= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [172.21.40.250] ([194.224.160.189]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MUXtY-1ilJP929Q0-00QVkz; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:36:27 +0100 To: Martin Thomson , Alexandre Petrescu Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:36:26 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:y0bRsYGhGIhkd6Yvse8476G+cB6Y0r9nfhsck91SbX/oL0L8eMZ bcX5F26tQNIyyjIcTVPxUP5VsymttkUzzEyqG4kPjFwCS/WXju/mjeWEUAq/9YnADdJscBs HfJtWopn6eohoEOEEjOwP/winwDmNMJS9gQ6mZFVs6LAW7HxNIevxuKYKZMhZ+L4vva+yY2 NO9yF1zqOXxCBH6yRhs8g== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:P/VInGD+TNI=:/HFwUugoHl6CdjHoBKTvjG sPN4N9/E1eR/lkF1+UiHXzPwclf4CW/+KkmFUGyMomRY/lm1tyxWt0SMNX+HE50dmZ3N2RKuj HqB5iSviB/YC+XmcHqGs5uHVqoVyQSXPveukGdThWhCOyjuS9lG72/LoNqP+ywoJcpkWzNJMa DQqus4JHAvF07VlZkg0a7oQ07JO2uwnlAZiTP+Hob9nfFJUmFEFcxOXEZMiNe0MrZNPqM0xQ6 2i3nB+z7v+W507HMV6KwChokO7irwMgx9C2L3vzGCro4w2dDr/twEVa7SlZIpRpg8+TF5brmL eyRrHcqtBeukZKhY3sbUQZbHBwwbHc56AqBARCQcPrExRxtGH5IRuIIrdN0Bg7sXenbRYGHOZ p0PYB4qDa8jQxzNrWNTBFipTmfyzZigH5Rhe8JlgaQykeexoZhDA3NfzBn4BLAstBP2CpdBbA 4ACHz6cQ19lqW41ZvhOl57HTy+XCHReAzZ4l9iEd+EKUBZLncuQm+xc9NcfabuuJiiVPhMJ2H N1nZHcZeWw0CG3IGYLum+tsd+OjkRn7NjGVfQZTR18TCbi7TFg4CLtC8AETxas+97c3FiWqOc gY44rq5eDjJ0mV3tGyTuITJ5I0PiXK4AfcaDDZ/d+p/l6JUYPcoKlyPDDd0hUQ85VxBf+eBv4 W1EZ0fi5GR6oyLvrHO62dn4vNekm//SwwvH2o0fYlwPNvLktGpSvtTk5+H+eLNunfwmm4kuWY 5swgHR4eyE0rEyGG9h9yNDDtVlDDisaL1ItMzMQ/V0ubCL7LTM6rza7RY+XA2VwJKkiWbtcTA U4jUkxqXrj2HrC9QGomzMbdOTWYI/S7GAWQBw9Ew+vRFsg8lM0m9AbgFbCJrbx2VdNCMww6w8 lhnmYyrCeGKJB2nn/6JC5LhIk2WMUoVRKUlP0vXxtaYlw2GqIQWJ/2m+V3/BNDC/vCdAX/ZPE cPHUPWkYTA0qXCswZ49JgBvZjaT+DuiDVyt3HHrX92go8t0T3hT+MiYq9i62ePGRwTNnZRQyM E83Cq2qgTHdI6KhA2sBnnE61qpJPfgetwStmO3gEETTEyEOjAmi/4JH8+EBEmACPnBAYkcBe9 E2K4VxDB7o4IngRwQnIUVFGQwJMRYlsPBsjZeq+4m6zSIcoFAZXsN3afrbyrBnONC0PxGmEcO akJQFRdpe1gfYQu30FGByFQYxhCZ66DmdtfXxXuB7njwQKmHb7sOZqFLMS0FTB1phS0BWT1wh fJxnGx1dgOo66SuNT Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 14:36:39 -0000 On 10.03.2020 06:50, Martin Thomson wrote: > ... > Yes. The whole charset thing is difficult, but if you use UTF-8 and Uni= code you will find that things just work. In most cases, you don't even h= ave to make an effort to do so because modern software has largely left th= e baggage of the past behind. We've recently added the real names of cont= ributors to the QUIC specs and it just worked. > ... Well. That's a stretch. AFAIU, you used an experimental feature in xml2rfv (""), which is not even documented yet, and which might change in the future. Things would be easier if xml2rfc did not insist on having non-ASCII characters only appear within certain markup constructs. In that case it really would be a case of "it just works". Best regards, Julian From nobody Tue Mar 10 07:47:11 2020 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 8F5323A13C0 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:47:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R8GoLQ0GCS0F for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:47:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 069113A13C8 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:47:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AEl574028775 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:47:05 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id CB02B205097 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:47:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFEFE204F1C for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:47:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AEl5tH014070 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:47:05 +0100 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <53307b7c-8575-9d7d-5504-d9dd7f7d5097@gmail.com> <1e6d4ab9-e647-48a6-8b25-3a904d96df47@www.fastmail.com> <6ff320e9-cc4a-5fda-0aed-d65e5221e9ad@gmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:47:05 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6ff320e9-cc4a-5fda-0aed-d65e5221e9ad@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] document editing and protocol implementation absent from draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 14:47:10 -0000 I need to clarify something about my sensed ubiquiteness and necessity of github. Not only I use github for my IETF activities but I also use its access control for document editing on my projects at work: sharepoint. The access control of several 'sharepoint' repositories where I connect is with my github account. This widely encompassing access control has some drawback in some of today's browsers: if one logs into one repository (e.g. a github repository) with one email address then the other repositories of same access control (e.g. sharepoint) wont work if that's not the same email address. A certain browser solves this problem by using 'Private Browsing' Ctl-Shift-P. It is the first time I absolutely and explicitely need privacy. I am not sure that's the intended goal of privacy, but that's where I need it. Alex Le 10/03/2020 à 13:20, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit : > > > Le 10/03/2020 à 13:06, Martin Thomson a écrit : >> Thanks Tim, I agree. >> >> The document concentrates on document production. Though GitHub >> is probably even better suited to software development, that's not >> an activity that the IETF needs to have such a strong hand in. If >> a working group wanted to develop a reference implementation or a >> test suite or other code product, then I would definitely >> recommend GitHub. But that is rare enough to treat on an ad hoc >> basis. Many people will use the tool for that purpose and more >> power to them for doing so, but we don't need supporting documents >> for that. > > In the WGs where I work often times the implementations are referred > to github. Many implementations are there. > > But indeed there are more places where the software code is put,more > than just github. > > The question would be whether to recommend one (github?), or a list > of them. > > Alex > >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 22:54, Tim Wicinski wrote: >>> >>> This document very much stays away from suggesting using github >>> to write software for protocol development. I would argue that >>> the decision on which tools to use in a WG project should be >>> decided by the WG based on needs, etc. >>> >>> tim >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:39 AM Alexandre Petrescu >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Le 10/03/2020 à 06:50, Martin Thomson a écrit : [...] >>>>>>> 3.1. What to Use GitHub For >>>>>> >>>>>> This section 3.1 is good in general, but does not seem to >>>>>> me to say What to Use GitHub For. This is what it should be >>>>>> used for: share Internet Drafts and share code >>>>>> implementing protocols. >>>>> >>>>> That is in the Introduction and Document Goals sections[...] >>>> >>>> I think that is not the case. >>>> >>>> It does say in Introduction and Document Goals that one goal >>>> is document editing. >>>> >>>> It does not say in either section that a goal of using github >>>> is to write software for protocol developped by that WG. >>>> >>>> Were it to say so, I would discuss it further. In one WG I am >>>> active I hesitate between recommending github for software >>>> writing, or another one. >>>> >>>> Alex >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > _______________________________________________ Ietf-and-github > mailing list Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Tue Mar 10 07:50:11 2020 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 EDF513A147B for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:50:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.668 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B1IOs1whJlUR for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 AA0053A1479 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 07:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AEo6eo030147; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:50:06 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 3E43E2050E2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:50:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E2D5205069; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:50:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AEo6i9016423; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:50:06 +0100 To: Julian Reschke , Martin Thomson Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:50:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 14:50:10 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 15:36, Julian Reschke a écrit : > On 10.03.2020 06:50, Martin Thomson wrote: >> ... Yes. The whole charset thing is difficult, but if you use >> UTF-8 and Unicode you will find that things just work. In most >> cases, you don't even have to make an effort to do so because >> modern software has largely left the baggage of the past behind. >> We've recently added the real names of contributors to the QUIC >> specs and it just worked. ... > > Well. > > That's a stretch. AFAIU, you used an experimental feature in xml2rfv > (""), which is not even documented yet, and which might > change in the future. I need perfect accents in the Ack section, not in the list of Authors or Contributors. Often Ack'ed people make more significant contrib or similar. does not work in the Ack section, I just tried. > Things would be easier if xml2rfc did not insist on having non-ASCII > characters only appear within certain markup constructs. In that case > it really would be a case of "it just works". Do you mean that me not being able to use ö in Ack section is a mistake of xml2rfc, and not a mistake of github? Alex > > Best regards, Julian From nobody Tue Mar 10 08:16:55 2020 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 AFB853A07FD for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:16:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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=gmx.net 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 5dOeVE3Ea2p5 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:16:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (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 98DBC3A1499 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 08:10:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1583853017; bh=4Tq7W+YFLdv87SnYg+ebhiQOx2PN/71I2eyM4jDlABo=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=HamNhWCpPyJMQcbQmZmLBPxRLC49dPakSkgxTJDp8c8PY5/pSrSA1KUWSqAofVDbx t5oIb7wPV4H1emBY2h2CzTy7be6CEebzEOjGl9N1VAVw6Zqvk8KWFms0wCI8G5FSCe ObPnTgAgFI1s4+fc7OT4p/+htlWjVUwud9S9alBg= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [172.21.40.250] ([194.224.160.189]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MbAci-1jmw523BA8-00bdPm; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:10:16 +0100 To: Alexandre Petrescu References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <6774efc6-0071-5f8b-8007-8c6ab124c754@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:10:16 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:4ABQf1HaO0qRvOMxwvWVUDzM0tzhHfszpTyOWT/IP6Q67AZPpHY Dux+iyLVUiAy4OMkB+dVkZHIqDz+9W99Ct9Yr6RMN85yNnZmtocRLb5MWT+TH1UirBdSCRo N4X2b4V7DZeSQjHrOFy6//8bc594DWtYgsl3uPuUKKqvMrqymH1e4QuOBRkwPZJlgdwR87S SHgwvxLKxpHSkfnLpFTwg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:sO9bvkdxwf0=:/r1ubGuQ7PaF+z079wZSK+ kj8GqQFEwKBHSAYIuHrQg/If7HkaaaL8qjy8tjPEmVdbnmBW63I1ItXsnku32v7QkyrM5/ais i1gzubbTJFXUKpqJhaVNORxYaV4H8DNKu9EDE7jMDsESyU3f4vw4afVxRS78G/fL/q3+zRSS0 zcJjgQs/lGNfCGJYvKp9kw+AlTcqq8HAAb/ez0dnuaP8eWFrQhWsYCPjylU/DwqQi5I4koEik 3cmTvRxmcl9d05IStdBUYMJNLDeT/QeYSAO7brdo5+Q+nKdxLD8jOCHtBQiMZgf8ZUivB1Yec 4Sk26u6u+WtWcyaNOOkqKEZBq6wSwIp6nOUYmHrwdm2sg/KHAYwYk7es6S9FXu3x/2BJNZg7y T4Bm3CzM0yya8g5WO6RdFTId3rdX3hAFBZjIWRhbdbUaKhTBpIrmO7BejSbk/a8VyHHXEZG+F dgNpNme5nZA6i7z44AsAVDV0lSZjusSTFcy76HwRKe1Z40roI8U4eENnsNNaAq5EjaDm8oj78 70MVfp141qIgDT/OPTtVwsZE6SN+CkOGbCiTSs1QlEmfzsIFLkBWtaa1U5jpAEy8bNm3zj5q+ k5ap+58deQkoE5sqkPaFZzZKDoMetJvkmHlVE+HQUPp+vwk6BjRwt5cMrp748SFma2t1Hwj2L cvBm4Tkp06y4AZ1PvxYxVosiO2MTrEtf0PFFnDzHAycuJtILpSXcnk6End+E3++GvufTNcsjd uuS2JFcE05W4h7S9oHMV54qrCIn/lCA1KN1PYC4YpAjZ4+oUol+kwrob3eEaErHmwmfyA3Yn8 fUT0Hg5Bfhz1vprRsG511Gxf/YORhy5pgwAWaXYmaVYMXeX2CFnhrnhEE3SKl2gpDEYl/Zl/2 NAtnCiBN8vl9lfPtdyb3Sux68Pz9tj9MPWs+NfmgsOHw9IyxUQDxNvquGRi//XvA9O9XmDDg+ 8fBuuVOAxcO5V/wMZRRFefHZHltFLvcz18Zz0hDWkO/Deme2sSIr9516zmiP+z6aAdznD0Irq O+ZGoPcFTCfgiGALmGNTfFOu5WRBGqkHHKq3iuaXXpFmSk0hA8oDnOvKzaOF77Sun/KCkrDG4 9Vc1JiQUOAiCvPGjwYtAB3kI4PyErtqTLNKGXmJj2DzRHpwVTUPrBK/MW8Mwx6AJQImzy+MVl jsrMWTNXbK4/2B2QhpHhS2xXbJrVf59511smfb3py3CWu0Pq1R8zX5Erh/x5KKYV2GgTiVEx7 hUDn3mjiuf/pN1IyQ Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 15:16:53 -0000 On 10.03.2020 15:50, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: > > > Le 10/03/2020 =C3=A0 15:36, Julian Reschke a =C3=A9crit : >> On 10.03.2020 06:50, Martin Thomson wrote: >>> ... Yes.=C2=A0 The whole charset thing is difficult, but if you use >>> UTF-8 and Unicode you will find that things just work.=C2=A0 In most >>> cases, you don't even have to make an effort to do so because >>> modern software has largely left the baggage of the past behind. >>> We've recently added the real names of contributors to the QUIC >>> specs and it just worked. ... >> >> Well. >> >> That's a stretch. AFAIU, you used an experimental feature in xml2rfv >> (""), which is not even documented yet, and which might >> change in the future. > > I need perfect accents in the Ack section, not in the list of Authors or > Contributors.=C2=A0 Often Ack'ed people make more significant contrib or > similar. > > does not work in the Ack section, I just tried. It's supposed to work there. What *exactly* did you try? >> Things would be easier if xml2rfc did not insist on having non-ASCII >> characters only appear within certain markup constructs. In that case >> it really would be a case of "it just works". > > Do you mean that me not being able to use =C3=B6 in Ack section is a mis= take > of xml2rfc, and not a mistake of github? github has nothing to do with that. The developer of xml2rfc has chosen to restrict non-ASCII characters further than defined in RFC 7991, essentially allowing them only in artwork/sourcecode and a few new special constructs. The intent of RFC 7991 was to just allow them everywhere, and let the RFC Production Center deal with overuse. Best regards, Julian From nobody Tue Mar 10 09:23:16 2020 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 E7ED03A12D2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:23:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=g72EeeQV; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=xKOETy38 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 m8cBa0izdWO7; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 307363A12D8; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:23:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=33315; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1583857384; x=1585066984; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=eAOUnNjGQSSohdlZVQL8zJN9JkE95aElyPNHStsn/ng=; b=g72EeeQVKtVJ2QVs0uFa4QUarYtYlhJ25z2JzuiPmL4HPU1c61ejMX3+ ZO763zyCw/WnQgFILsrb/4/yL4tnSpZP5MqHdrOvPFQKn0oQlBM0+DY2a KTd9GziIJlWJ7OnGPytw4BYGbOz6f83Zzbq3f4gb29BcRZ15ua8NL3qOS k=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3A1AHCXhGxMz8ffeAhqo7Ok51GYnJ96bzpIg4Y7I?= =?us-ascii?q?YmgLtSc6Oluo7vJ1Hb+e4z1A3SRYuO7fVChqKWqK3mVWEaqbe5+HEZON0pNV?= =?us-ascii?q?cejNkO2QkpAcqLE0r+eeT1bigmG8JqX15+9Hb9Ok9QS47z?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AnAgALvmde/4kNJK1mHQEBAQkBEQU?= =?us-ascii?q?FAYFqBQELAYEkLyQsBWxYIAQLKgqHUAOKcJp0gUKBEANUCQEBAQwBAS0CBAE?= =?us-ascii?q?BhEMCggYkNwYOAgMBAQsBAQUBAQECAQUEbYVWDIVmFhsTAQE3AREBNQsBPyY?= =?us-ascii?q?BBAENDQwOgwWBfU0DLgGebwKBOYhigieCfwEBBYUPGIIMCYE4AYwrGoFBP4E?= =?us-ascii?q?RR4cPAREBEgEjPYMEgiyOIog8JIlrj0EKgjyXB4JKjHKLfo55gU6aBAIEAgQ?= =?us-ascii?q?FAg4BAQWBaCMqPXFwFYMnUBgNjh2Dc4pVdIEpjEcBgQ8BAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,537,1574121600"; d="scan'208,217";a="445215559" Received: from alln-core-4.cisco.com ([173.36.13.137]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 10 Mar 2020 16:23:03 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by alln-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02AGN2hM001694 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:23:03 GMT Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:23:02 -0500 Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:23:02 -0500 Received: from NAM04-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:23:02 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=FkpcyJAa6LczkC5anmQGT+St5kWEtNHyOJ2YN2SeM+Lc7elsJBH4AQV3Kjae4mdRfwCNcR796JsFUNhz30W85cFSDJokQ9SUOGPnOt6PRM6KhfkxLCEG8CabYj0M6vXbawXBzq+ksUl0flc0MOY/XS3cc3NKaimS8Y1cdowTQn+L9BJVxPYSAlq4zaAJaSNBZPBEXWOy0LIbFEmw6RUufGh8YJmQ2gBS4bDJjx4xN4Za8+nfqItmGijOWqUSr1fxxfZodoe1wtgQUUsi9VPeSoOP8UUk4CLXJqOzQVwyqV7v14gYi28bV0uaTlnT3GUnfk/kxhytakt2y4JkcnUZ8A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=UuYl4q5Q6zgJSp+y+UyawfpfAWLEj0jlZCUbRn6MHWU=; b=nsK0j8BWFwZgGbFhjxzw4giXF0Je/Wj7M/lEJL3zGpQLSkGIl/WxiBQXqVPO3fQbrO7qWZhCdd3lXQpzLVAIeZXcCMRM8DI7NlCwnYamOpFlXOwpg5WmNXxgC5Vx0+PVXXiLiADpP1MeWsx5uRMwAgucnBkMdnY5NFedwOeRhitQnqugOsjaP8nfbP8GC/Kd04AxmOfwnBUQeqxJNDwdQz/IwaHm8Zse3h92eynMitGZjY//IM0kz2mBUFeN+nM1mq6mbk02CEpVCnGrGDKiGabvQ42xcDVeB6Sx2TEK7Bu2n3/RMhM/ObGblbFvc+fNLgJFyaQjJPRIePOyVT5s9g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=UuYl4q5Q6zgJSp+y+UyawfpfAWLEj0jlZCUbRn6MHWU=; b=xKOETy38fxyDFgbKka3SiqRLVM7K6AAC3lcQXud3aX4gmOhLiictr5Vyj4A5Ur2UdJK00TYOBLhWI/ccGvs/Egcg0dPtF1gjypzJRTtb0eDxBEROdLJDBFJUooPK3U3ms2GAxx6rKIyw6VJSIfn00FnnUAa5bQaxxfyuaGf97tE= Received: from BY5PR11MB4355.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:1c3::13) by BY5PR11MB4369.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:1cb::25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.17; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:23:01 +0000 Received: from BY5PR11MB4355.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5434:7127:ff4b:e6f4]) by BY5PR11MB4355.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5434:7127:ff4b:e6f4%4]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.013; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:23:01 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "caw@heapingbits.net" Thread-Topic: RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 Thread-Index: AdX20DXn6nk7ia9BTXi3bSvYC2yFiw== Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:23:01 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [173.38.220.34] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8e226bd8-419c-403b-a668-08d7c50f4da3 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BY5PR11MB4369: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 033857D0BD x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(396003)(366004)(136003)(199004)(189003)(66556008)(66446008)(76116006)(66476007)(55016002)(110136005)(2906002)(6506007)(9686003)(5660300002)(186003)(478600001)(64756008)(54906003)(7696005)(4326008)(86362001)(66946007)(26005)(316002)(81156014)(81166006)(8676002)(8936002)(9326002)(71200400001)(33656002)(52536014)(66574012); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BY5PR11MB4369; H:BY5PR11MB4355.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: DBcGhJiwCP5BVJge5yvBy8nhkB8tmaE4NmLuCxhvaIItRmfcmhvOMkmZVdXnYLT2RC8Ek0s2vLbVrVPgPQAxpHrhgYKdj1GL9jju2k3VQs9M5rVgoxTwlH+PkVk3EAa0uR1i1ycPoynEtJSMeMe30SZANOjbA6y5dEbi17Fisal43picMUUYQhcWNuTvTMw1YChFHtA2xFRCLRw3Ud8OQhoQdi+qwI1HQH/x1KXK6ZqcbeNW2QrNz6wL4ifi1NI1+YiT66bvsyeczKRA2OlhJEV9WbHZwQjbwNCkAN5rjnaiFkVQULETlJcmxEgFok8paZmZTQk4OvS5emMP9SZjtHUTLVULJbdZRmiqfaT31L5ix7oI5gAoFvAjpXH4UKNR3Y1H5NhaOkZr8viSipl588EZAvGDm8TktuRgbtI4PkuOHrPdCCnJm60EsHVFewUK x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: ABdELPtdAWGkGxj9kg4BvT6jLBH9OfXWqDG3l5zZTSXWvf00u6EwZOstMqselrKMeUIYIqVde49Alozoa6X+9Qstp2/ZEPsArt/42iiw+JkD8FpOFu3UC+rcktsD5HhRkL4tS85gCXJblKQ1qGybeg== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BY5PR11MB43554E4D2C6E916F070B680BB5FF0BY5PR11MB4355namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8e226bd8-419c-403b-a668-08d7c50f4da3 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Mar 2020 16:23:01.1617 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: qlhqrH1XkX51aViUr+npq1E9WeeQ0dSdR6hOscWVMyTOtCRvwzYTiSUmhPvUmmyEBCDFJnMyk/jDzqIAR6yDYg== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY5PR11MB4369 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.14, xch-aln-004.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-4.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 16:23:12 -0000 --_000_BY5PR11MB43554E4D2C6E916F070B680BB5FF0BY5PR11MB4355namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I have reviewed this document as an incoming Ops/Mgmt AD. Overall, I am a strong proponent of this work, and I'm of the opinion that = leveraging tools such as github can and will greatly help IETF. I do have some comments/questions/suggestions on the document: Main comments: 1. My main concerns with IETF's use of github are: * Losing ownership control of the repository. * Inexperienced users accidentally committing private SSH keys, or o= therwise leaking access. * Loosing access to historical data if a new better tool comes along= , e.g. if we want to migrate repositories. I think that (a) can be mitigated by adding extra organization owners, beyo= nd just the responsible AD. E.g., the github-config suggests also adding t= he Secretariat. We should be consistent here, and I think that we should d= ecide whether having just the AD and Secretariat is sufficient. Would it a= lso make sense to mandate the 2FA must be used by all members? If so, then = this can be enforced in the organization settings. The second point can probably be mitigated in a couple of ways: - Educating users: to ensure that they don't accidentally commit credential= s to the repo, to enable 2FA, and to generate account recovery passwords. = Should this document cover this. - Perhaps having a gitignore file that filters out standard ssh key names? The third point I know least about. I understand that the plan is that IET= F will backup the repos + issues + wikipages? Hopefully the issues/wikipag= es are backed up in a format that a script could be written to update into = future tools if required. 1. It was slightly unclear to me exactly what the full lifecycle of mana= ging documents in github is meant to be. E.g. is it only for drafts up to = the point that they are published as RFCs, or is there an expectation that = repositories could exist for longer than that, e.g. for tracking issues, fu= ture revisions, or errata. I think that there are some source of truth con= siderations here that perhaps need to be carefully documented in the repo r= eadme. E.g. folks reading the doc on github are not getting the formal RFC= , no notification about errata, etc. I also have some other comments on particular sections: 1.3: Other Services "This document concentrates primarily on GitHub as it has a large and active community of contributors." - Presumably another reason why github was chosen wasn't just because of la= rge/active contributors, but also because various IETF WGs are actively mak= ing use of github for managing documents - I know that we are. 1.4: Document Goals "This document only aims to address use of GitHub in developing Documents" - As above regarding the comment on document lifecycle, is that just throug= h to RFC editor, or beyond? 1.5: Notational Conventions "The words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", and "MAY" are used in this document. It's not shouting; when they are capitalized, they have the special meaning defined in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174]." - Nice, but this doesn't appear to quite follow the normal RFC8174 boilerpl= ate. ;-) 2.1: Organizations Each organization requires owners. The owner team for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area Directors. - Should this also include IETF Secretariat (i.e. for consistency with the = github configuration draft)? 2.2: Communicating Policies - Should IETF github repositories not also have a LICENSE file? E.g. in ali= gnment with the Note-well? 3: Deciding to Use GitHub Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for anything more than managing drafts. - Is it clear what "draft" means here? Would "Internet-Draft" be better? = It might be worth checking other usage of draft in the document. 3.1: What to Use GitHub For - Looking at the first paragraph in section 3, and the second paragraph in = section 3.1, it is slightly unclear to me whether it is the WG or WG chairs= who choose whether github should be used by the WG. "Features that the Working Group does not rely upon SHOULD be made available to document editors." "Chairs SHOULD periodically consult with document editors to ensure that policies are effective." - I suggest "should" rather than SHOULD for both of these. "A document editor can still use GitHub independently for documents that they edit, even if the Working Group does not expressly choose to use GitHub. Any such public repository MUST follow the IETF Note Well and bear notices; see Section 2.2. This recognizes that editors have traditionally chosen their own methods for managing the documents they edit but preserves the need for contributors to understand their obligations with respect to IETF processes." - I agree with the sentiment here, but I think that there perhaps should be= some more rules: - Is the assumption that this repository is not under ietf-wg-? - If not, perhaps this document should recommended a statement that th= e repository is for use by the authors and does not necessarily reflect the= procedures defined in draft-ietf-git-using-github, and that the WG work fo= rmally happens on the WG email alias. 3.3: Editors and Contributors Working Groups MAY create a team for regular contributors that is only given read access to a repository. This does not confer additional privileges on these contributors, it instead allows for issues and pull requests to be assigned to those people. This can be used to manage the assignment of editorial or review tasks to individuals outside of the editor team. - If these are public repositories then I would thought that everyone ha= s read access anyway, and can have issues assigned to them, etc. 6: Internet-Draft Publication Revisions used to generate documents that are submitted as Internet- Drafts SHOULD be tagged in repositories to provide a record of submissions. - Perhaps suggest the format of the tag. I.e. the tag should just be th= e name/version of the draft being published. [Ideally, longer term we woul= d have tooling to help with this.] Thanks, Rob --_000_BY5PR11MB43554E4D2C6E916F070B680BB5FF0BY5PR11MB4355namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

 

I have reviewed this document as an incoming Ops/Mgm= t AD.

 

Overall, I am a strong proponent of this work, and I= ’m of the opinion that leveraging tools such as github can and will g= reatly help IETF.

 

I do have some comments/questions/suggestions on the= document:

 

Main comments:

 

  1. My main concerns with IETF’s use of github are:
    1. Losing ownership control of the repository.
    2. Inexperienced users accidentally committing private SSH keys, or otherwise = leaking access.
    3. Loosing access to historical data if a new better tool comes along, e.g. if= we want to migrate repositories.

 

I think that (a) can be mitigated by adding extra or= ganization owners, beyond just the responsible AD.  E.g., the github-c= onfig suggests also adding the Secretariat.  We should be consistent h= ere, and I think that we should decide whether having just the AD and Secretariat is sufficient.  Would it also make= sense to mandate the 2FA must be used by all members? If so, then this can= be enforced in the organization settings.

 

The second point can probably be mitigated in a coup= le of ways:

- Educating users: to ensure that they don’t a= ccidentally commit credentials to the repo, to enable 2FA, and to generate = account recovery passwords.  Should this document cover this.

- Perhaps having a gitignore file that filters out s= tandard ssh key names?

 

The third point I know least about.  I understa= nd that the plan is that IETF will backup the repos + issues + wiki= pages?  Hopefully the issues/wikipages are backed up in a format that = a script could be written to update into future tools if required.

 

 

  1. It was slightly unclear to me exactly what the full lifecycle of managing d= ocuments in github is meant to be.  E.g. is it only for drafts up to t= he point that they are published as RFCs, or is there an expectation that r= epositories could exist for longer than that, e.g. for tracking issues, future revisions, or errata.  I think= that there are some source of truth considerations here that perhaps need = to be carefully documented in the repo readme.  E.g. folks reading the= doc on github are not getting the formal RFC, no notification about errata, etc.

 

 

I also have some other comments on particular sectio= ns:

 

1.3: Other Services

   “This document concentrates prima= rily on GitHub as it has a large and

   active community of contributors.”= ;

 

- Presumably another reason why github was chosen wa= sn't just because of large/active contributors, but also because various IE= TF WGs are actively making use of github for managing documents – I k= now that we are.

 

1.4: Document Goals

   “This document only aims to addre= ss use of GitHub in developing

   Documents”

 

- As above regarding the comment on document lifecyc= le, is that just through to RFC editor, or beyond?

 

1.5: Notational Conventions

   “The words "MUST", &quo= t;MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", and "MAY= " are

   used in this document.  It's not s= houting; when they are capitalized,

   they have the special meaning defined i= n BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174].”

 

- Nice, but this doesn't appear to quite follow the = normal RFC8174 boilerplate. ;-)

 

 

2.1: Organizations

 

   Each organization requires owners. = ; The owner team for a Working

   Group repository MUST include responsib= le Area Directors.

   

- Should this also include IETF Secretariat (i.e. fo= r consistency with the github configuration draft)?

 

 

2.2: Communicating Policies

 

- Should IETF github repositories not also have a LI= CENSE file? E.g. in alignment with the Note-well?

 

3: Deciding to Use GitHub

 

   Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in a= ny decision to use GitHub for

   anything more than managing drafts.

  

- Is it clear what "draft" means here?&nbs= p; Would “Internet-Draft” be better?  It might be worth ch= ecking other usage of draft in the document.

 

 

3.1: What to Use GitHub For

- Looking at the first paragraph in section 3, and t= he second paragraph in section 3.1, it is slightly unclear to me whether it= is the WG or WG chairs who choose whether github should be used by the WG.=

   "Features that the Working Gr= oup does not rely upon SHOULD be made

   available to document editors."

   "Chairs SHOULD periodically c= onsult with

   document editors to ensure that policie= s are effective."

- I suggest “should” rather than SHOULD = for both of these.

   “A document editor can still= use GitHub independently for documents

   that they edit, even if the Working Gro= up does not expressly choose

   to use GitHub.  Any such public re= pository MUST follow the IETF Note

   Well and bear notices; see Section 2.2.=   This recognizes that editors

   have traditionally chosen their own met= hods for managing the

   documents they edit but preserves the n= eed for contributors to

   understand their obligations with respe= ct to IETF processes.”

- I agree with the sentiment here, but I think that = there perhaps should be some more rules:

     - Is the assumption that th= is repository is not under ietf-wg-<name>?

     - If not, perhaps this docu= ment should recommended a statement that the repository is for use by the a= uthors and does not necessarily reflect the procedures defined in draft-iet= f-git-using-github, and that the WG work formally happens on the WG email alias.

 

 

3.3: Editors and Contributors

   Working Groups MAY create a team f= or regular contributors that is

   only given read access to a repository.=   This does not confer

   additional privileges on these contribu= tors, it instead allows for

   issues and pull requests to be assigned= to those people.  This can be

   used to manage the assignment of editor= ial or review tasks to

   individuals outside of the editor team.=

 

   - If these are public repositories= then I would thought that everyone has read access anyway, and can have is= sues assigned to them, etc.

  

 

6: Internet-Draft Publication

 

   Revisions used to generate documents th= at are submitted as Internet-

   Drafts SHOULD be tagged in repositories= to provide a record of

   submissions. 

 

   - Perhaps suggest the format of th= e tag.  I.e. the tag should just be the name/version of the draft bein= g published.  [Ideally, longer term we would have tooling to help with= this.]

 

Thanks,

Rob

 

 

 

--_000_BY5PR11MB43554E4D2C6E916F070B680BB5FF0BY5PR11MB4355namp_-- From nobody Tue Mar 10 09:32:55 2020 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 9143F3A15E3 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:32:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5F4O42OSHito for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:32:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 880893A15C1 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AGWb3G004417; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:32:37 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id A8D0E2051CE; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:32:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE53205069; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:32:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02AGWbfQ018942; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:32:37 +0100 To: Julian Reschke Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> <6774efc6-0071-5f8b-8007-8c6ab124c754@gmx.de> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:32:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6774efc6-0071-5f8b-8007-8c6ab124c754@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 16:32:48 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 16:10, Julian Reschke a écrit : > On 10.03.2020 15:50, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> >> >> Le 10/03/2020 à 15:36, Julian Reschke a écrit : >>> On 10.03.2020 06:50, Martin Thomson wrote: >>>> ... Yes.  The whole charset thing is difficult, but if you use >>>> UTF-8 and Unicode you will find that things just work.  In most >>>> cases, you don't even have to make an effort to do so because >>>> modern software has largely left the baggage of the past behind. >>>> We've recently added the real names of contributors to the QUIC >>>> specs and it just worked. ... >>> >>> Well. >>> >>> That's a stretch. AFAIU, you used an experimental feature in xml2rfv >>> (""), which is not even documented yet, and which might >>> change in the future. >> >> I need perfect accents in the Ack section, not in the list of Authors or >> Contributors.  Often Ack'ed people make more significant contrib or >> similar. >> >> does not work in the Ack section, I just tried. > > It's supposed to work there. What *exactly* did you try? I have tried to write people's names in the Ack section. "ä" became "ae". Japanese characters got un-understandable - scrambled in a strange way. Then, from private feedback, I tried to put in the Ack section. The xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org complains this: Error: Unable to validate the XML document: INPUT : Line 1439: Element contact is not declared in t list of possible children : Line 1440: No declaration for element contact : Line 1440: No declaration for attribute fullname of element contact The xml file is local on my Windows 10 computer but is shared on a github repository with an application called "Github Desktop". >>> Things would be easier if xml2rfc did not insist on having non-ASCII >>> characters only appear within certain markup constructs. In that case >>> it really would be a case of "it just works". >> >> Do you mean that me not being able to use ö in Ack section is a mistake >> of xml2rfc, and not a mistake of github? > > github has nothing to do with that. I tend to agree with that. I tried testing xml2rfc with a local file, or with the same file stored through github. The result is the same, independently whether is on github or not on github. The error is the following: Source: > > Ole Trøan, 神明達哉 (TATUYA Jinmei), Jérôme Härri. It > would be great if xml2rfc could compile these characters > ok. People's names are probably the most important thing > in an I-D. > Compilation results in: > > Ole Troean, 神明達哉 (TATUYA Jinmei), Jerome > Haerri. It would be great if xml2rfc could compile these characters > ok. People's names are probably the most important thing in an I-D. That is why I think I agree with you. I was wrong saying github has an error in accents. It might be the problem is xml2rfc, actually. > The developer of xml2rfc has chosen to restrict non-ASCII characters > further than defined in RFC 7991, essentially allowing them only in > artwork/sourcecode and a few new special constructs. The intent of RFC > 7991 was to just allow them everywhere, and let the RFC Production > Center deal with overuse. Thank you for the explanation. I dont really understand it fully, but it looks understandable. For my part, it would be great if accents were ok in the Ack section. (I have other complaints to xml2rfc, like xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org's *.txt.pdf output file names, about which I got suggested to register to tools-discuss email list and suggest it there; one day). Alex > > Best regards, Julian From nobody Tue Mar 10 09:59:03 2020 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 6849D3A1742; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:58:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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=fastmail.fm header.b=P1K+tNhw; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=IY+UxTww 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 2FHtCftb1572; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78FFD3A172C; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:58:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933122205E; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:58:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap21 ([10.202.2.71]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:58:47 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to:cc :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm2; bh=7ifF7 U/A9jdVhUxdNWlKdIfsokD3amMYWpPyDxUMmkA=; b=P1K+tNhwKiG41gmsUCPKJ NTot63m6ZNE+SgaHTb2XbUepWhAb5uRsrxgmmmS98xsrVUhzvh/OjGZ3MlRFu1+Y oxg9YgzItLuLa5Eva4x46hOQZJmbjf4UQYScJO9eAKDc62q7Cq5Fv3yEICasyO2E ptHRhNYf/5KbmGNXBBpSCJsBX0HizFiztCptHIakenvWVybQDMovQW9N6hook2v+ Ub2U9K8dnAz8flqi3FSU66iwfgHzBKpsOa6FF9wEfKt9cASzg8Qvm8afsQMff2p6 alxbz5JJeVa8sSEhXXksjeoPh/6b3wnBU7YHWKJBaZDoqzqM4iMY/U8CeyjJUOCA g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=7ifF7U/A9jdVhUxdNWlKdIfsokD3amMYWpPyDxUMm kA=; b=IY+UxTwwr1+lZiG9Ax8LL9s2kAl1fBTG2nfd8Ng9/dTIUhWWGXSedi0KA O6poXPv0SgYHNMANmYEki4CgLfdaQudDyL51fur4/iA3MJ5rj5vwkjjbXyGGhosm ZbxkhmX63l+Bkq6pYbAG1zHP1AGnB47hVFEq5vH+eyQLQT+t5rlK6u9vLdqSSM52 S3+FoJV+0T+97q8YwgzkDwMTWS7JaiUDL9mSB8a0wuD5S6qgSuChIRETPULhfsc4 3w7OqGrCUJsQKr8kBTIQPGye6H0QuflUFuVSSAnSRAJUItF0pKoukfrN/oxvF7IS UCgTq+DZL9D38IHiML1ICN2W0+UIQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvtddgkeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedftehl vgigvgihucfovghlnhhikhhovhdfuceorggrmhgvlhhnihhkohhvsehfrghsthhmrghilh drfhhmqeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhm pegrrghmvghlnhhikhhovhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdhfmh X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id DAF0B660069; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:58:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <38d69883-1a64-4420-b0ca-aa9a90677506@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <158384553133.16615.11059440188197778998@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158384553133.16615.11059440188197778998@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:58:24 +0000 From: "Alexey Melnikov" To: "Barry Leiba" , "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, "caw@heapingbits.net" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Barry_Leiba=27s_Yes_on_draft-ietf-gi?= =?utf-8?q?t-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 16:58:58 -0000 Hi Barry, On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 1:05 PM, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote: > =E2=80=94 Section 3 =E2=80=94 >=20 > Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub fo= r > anything more than managing drafts. >=20 > I=E2=80=99m not objecting to this, but... why? If the WGCs may decide= to use github > for drafts without involving the ADs, why can=E2=80=99t they also deci= de to use it for > charter revisions, agendas, and minutes without involving the ADs? I read the above text as talking about how GitHub is going to be used (i= .e. discussing different levels of using GitHub) as opposed to whether i= t is going to be used for drafts, charter revisions, etc. I think the MU= ST makes sense in that context. I agree that the text can be clarified. Best Regards, Alexey =20 From nobody Tue Mar 10 10:25:03 2020 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 7B5D93A17F2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:24:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Warren Kumari via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Warren Kumari Message-ID: <158386109541.16573.6571161778032375801@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:24:55 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Abstain on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 17:24:56 -0000 Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Abstain When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for working groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: "Whether working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document does let WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" way. I happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and use that to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing our working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at it can be turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" paradigm for a reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be entirely their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wrong - and a BCP does that... The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it." but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: "Working Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being managed on Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has always been clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't change it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes more places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place where is is really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the argument that it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *opinion* the right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHub" applies to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels very close to the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with a Bic pen when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of gitea, gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives one tool prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when people happen to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue tracker to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal convenience -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions get made in the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this will end up with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker, and those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions made. 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides to fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or implicitly) disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one when a document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues between repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can't transfer an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they have to be (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state (I may also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that talks about migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version, and what should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at www.github.com/wkumari/ to www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administrative annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could see. I think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that moving the repo entails. Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: maintain a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub - but I really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the "one true way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). From nobody Tue Mar 10 10:31:32 2020 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 1F3C33A1807 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:31:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 UhOuYAdXoa1V for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:31:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [64.170.98.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C93D3A1806 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:31:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from h-202-242.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([158.174.202.242]:58245 helo=tannat.localdomain) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jBiie-0000kL-Qs; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:31:26 -0700 To: Alexandre Petrescu References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> <6774efc6-0071-5f8b-8007-8c6ab124c754@gmx.de> Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org From: Henrik Levkowetz Message-ID: <73e036e7-7ce5-4bd5-1b42-f208c2eadc5b@levkowetz.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 18:30:56 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qIhjcuuTtaIw5tdK4QedMG4lhhh3MPaEW" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 158.174.202.242 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 17:31:30 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --qIhjcuuTtaIw5tdK4QedMG4lhhh3MPaEW Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="BU1sOuiOtSETBKx80DCpQw46J88qMSKvl"; protected-headers="v1" From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alexandre Petrescu Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Message-ID: <73e036e7-7ce5-4bd5-1b42-f208c2eadc5b@levkowetz.com> Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> <6774efc6-0071-5f8b-8007-8c6ab124c754@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: --BU1sOuiOtSETBKx80DCpQw46J88qMSKvl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Alexandre, On 2020-03-10 17:32, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: > I have tried to write people's names in the Ack section. "=C3=A4" beca= me=20 > "ae". Japanese characters got un-understandable - scrambled in a=20 > strange way. >=20 > Then, from private feedback, I tried to put (Ole Troan)."/> in the Ack section. >=20 > The xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org complains this: > Error: Unable to validate the XML document: INPUT > : Line 1439: Element contact is not declared in t list of=20 > possible children > : Line 1440: No declaration for element contact > : Line 1440: No declaration for attribute fullname of element= =20 > contact It looks as if you're running your XML through the v2 parser and formatte= r. To use the element you need to use the v3 parser and formatter,= either by converting your v2 xml explicitly to v3 with 'xml2rfc --v2v3', or by having it done on the fly by using the v3 switch 'xml2rfc --v3 ...'= =2E The legacy v2 parser and formatters knows nothing about the new v3 elemen= ts. Best regards, Henrik --BU1sOuiOtSETBKx80DCpQw46J88qMSKvl-- --qIhjcuuTtaIw5tdK4QedMG4lhhh3MPaEW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEifjc5+rnL1MJBcZSTptXS4+7FxoFAl5nztAACgkQTptXS4+7 FxqksA//Tl4Ah999lULv4PaHWWhpbat0nWXDHGtHcPuPuIEQPjZJcceFgv9nLiMz 0nt64G/Tt579TjBBTaTmFjXcxsVm+KUBlWtEkOsQ5t+r+o/77b9rtTOPZKJI0UgE kiTt42hq9mqTMK+Qp0CJ9evGMcsi7De/NQw7jiV3l56ahs5sE7iv7uqDROo3UrTB v6/TRb49s5BSj3xWsq0tDOrSu8wSBPFe7JJUTwl/h0DuW9pd25HaM/CrkofO+SMs 1Uw4QdGCGdWHAYH36srkpVncn5ovOBEAHbI9k6VkANoQZ8w2eygLJglI6oU23Zjq kX3fTNVgzjFzj2HciJQDK+xcX5I+S45ycvOd42IwNddaubF4AnfRsriZ+vGI5NbY VjiBwmqNitadcmn7/0yIRPX4sH9nyDlu4eh+UUfu02tDwUM+Pk03lE7X+d5fSLek xj/gHpQYmz1GODdKv7eUScXPqyAJ2iGG5IQJN24TwwMYsLJMfssbw4AYX0MSaBI5 DQNobpbuqhHWW530tJHCRwlqRJnleYq0Nb6GnTiwgj4H34hhXgbNf1O7yOWdY+Af FybZqwPsrjwTpGXvBWajVs8VNS54Rev1rKKm2/7cnGY+aObEGmwefM68+3/QUi40 UfZzK3KWJ2g7XmU9qtawR7f3PKdxsUbvgbGeE/abZpNjJr1rdW8= =E0hE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qIhjcuuTtaIw5tdK4QedMG4lhhh3MPaEW-- From nobody Tue Mar 10 10:45:35 2020 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 078073A0101; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:45:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Warren Kumari via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Warren Kumari Message-ID: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:45:14 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 17:45:16 -0000 Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering me enough that I'm changing it to a discuss. This feels like additional centralization / control / process, without good justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with discussion / agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents include something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github at https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version of the document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. The authors gratefully accept pull requests. ]" This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administering, etc a WG organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I could find) on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use GitHub (because it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. If WG documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can find it, and we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having control and process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for working groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: "Whether working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document does let WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" way. I happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and use that to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing our working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at it can be turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" paradigm for a reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be entirely their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wrong - and a BCP does that... The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it." but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: "Working Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being managed on Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has always been clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't change it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes more places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place where is is really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the argument that it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *opinion* the right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHub" applies to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels very close to the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with a Bic pen when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of gitea, gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives one tool prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when people happen to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue tracker to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal convenience -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions get made in the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this will end up with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker, and those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions made. 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides to fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or implicitly) disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one when a document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues between repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can't transfer an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they have to be (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state (I may also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that talks about migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version, and what should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at www.github.com/wkumari/ to www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administrative annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could see. I think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that moving the repo entails. Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: maintain a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub - but I really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the "one true way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). From nobody Tue Mar 10 11:02:01 2020 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 CB8873A058F for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:01:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 VBmPGrgoaq3t for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:01:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 A861F3A046D for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:01:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id e18so15215229ljn.12 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:01:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=a3D1kTTOTtsFVRfRNrMtUTi2d+2f78pWVsmrRJ+aZzI=; b=v7N1ABEa91+KakO0qwhjT0psv6U8rh1ZvFlFzMGy8PrpDJV+O3bkWiNFet1jwd0uMG CCApHe9wjUstpoBSeG97B0JteRk56CmzUz71bkfWzLvcDG7FxTsQuOHsADMQzRhrlWHr X84ex25DlYo3gFLIJwfz++M6WXxEfvOpjNdjRlqxGN1ldhS75rx4fKSQcSciNIb9SmkM jo2OQCzQVP++rIkC1ONIYR3KWLO6Bqqulbe4CiO4Dk0YzI1pu9/zKSGc/g9PFpQ0pQLR DOMKPmdv8PRH3rStniVnGeLNy1/v+csCPFrTQAsW8YWBvbWvqCAYFU4CGPJJThDBCJnx 8anw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=a3D1kTTOTtsFVRfRNrMtUTi2d+2f78pWVsmrRJ+aZzI=; b=NRD1387d/bnctie8se8heMiR0FlswGJX56VmNy3KuHzPcNAS4Kt7QMv7bDVE4iHHiB RVtAkMdN0S88v09qIb32DHafA7objd82HvCom+/ZKO/zjKGjFCnPWPd9OMmVXNkko4bl OvE6Pzb+c28XtUhQ+9lZu7cbbWLpMz5cCydrybZ53aQMkJwEac/faBupxGOx+ZRNM8xF LhYfDos5UWcwHGBFa1tEtGvuEVMRRAEYyZbn0+eCrCrwXszEDwk8Ux+lKVuxsk021Ggf qHc75fHgQUF/ufQWnSmJJ0Sq/NMzbRrVvrFhOk+NB578ThPCtPC9bACk8HxAfUTfcFmw vyFg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0HJeL78BWEkOe4ySKfSd68pQl86pcdHAGXIYKOaY9uPKw+o7TN K1d3BYpjamaD+RhJyTKHsdrPbIsth0JY5B46edK+og== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtCRzax6bTKwRRLrixoHvKbt3wmMjRBTLCye8ahE8bZyOXIkG0OcHxsqYkxEhbOclG0hVj5jCR0ob4Q3z+Qn8c= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8745:: with SMTP id q5mr12634516ljj.120.1583863306830; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:01:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:01:10 -0700 Message-ID: To: Warren Kumari Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c6da9c05a083e94e" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 18:01:53 -0000 --000000000000c6da9c05a083e94e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Warren, I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies to this DISCUSS? -Ekr [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/ On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker < noreply@ietf.org> wrote: > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering me > enough > that I'm changing it to a discuss. > > This feels like additional centralization / control / process, without good > justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with > discussion / > agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents include > something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github at > https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version of the > document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. The > authors > gratefully accept pull requests. ]" > > This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administering, etc > a WG > organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I could > find) > on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use GitHub > (because > it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. If WG > documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can find > it, and > we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having control > and > process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. > > I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: > 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for > working > groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: > "Whether > working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support > their > work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document does > let > WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" way. I > happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and use > that > to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing our > working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at it > can be > turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" paradigm > for a > reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be entirely > their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wrong - > and a > BCP does that... > > The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not > alter the > Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within > it." > but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: > "Working > Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being managed on > Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has always > been > clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't > change > it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes more > places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place where is > is > really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. > > 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the argument > that > it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *opinion* > the > right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHub" > applies > to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels very > close to > the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with a Bic > pen > when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: > "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of gitea, > gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives one tool > prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. > > 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when people > happen > to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue > tracker > to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal > convenience > -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions get > made in > the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this will > end up > with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker, and > those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions made. > > 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides to > fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or > implicitly) > disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. > > 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one when a > document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues between > repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can't > transfer > an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they have > to be > (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state (I may > also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that talks > about > migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version, and > what > should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at > www.github.com/wkumari/ to > www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administrative > annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could see. > I > think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the > documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that moving > the > repo entails. > > Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: > maintain > a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub - > but I > really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the "one > true > way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > --000000000000c6da9c05a083e94e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Warren,

I've got some= thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but before I do that, w= hich of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies to this DISCUSS?
<= /div>

-Ekr


[0] <= a href=3D"https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criter= ia/">https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/




On Tue, Mar 10, 2020= at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot posi= tion for
draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/s= tatement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-= ietf-git-using-github/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering me enou= gh
that I'm changing it to a discuss.

This feels like additional centralization / control / process, without good=
justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with discussi= on /
agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents include something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github at=
https://github.com/wkumari/<draft-name>.=C2=A0 The most recent= =C2=A0 version of the
document, open issues, and so on should all be available there.=C2=A0 The a= uthors
gratefully accept pull requests. ]"

This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administering, etc a= WG
organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I could fi= nd)
on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use GitHub (beca= use
it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. If WG documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can find it,= and
we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having cont= rol and
process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS.

I'm uncomfortable with much of this document:
1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way = for working
groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: "= Whether
working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support t= heir
work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document d= oes let
WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best"= ; way. I
happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and use th= at
to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing our working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at = it can be
turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" pa= radigm for a
reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be entirely=
their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is = wrong - and a
BCP does that...

The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not = alter the
Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within i= t."
but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: "W= orking
Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being managed on Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has alw= ays been
clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't c= hange
it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes more places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place where is = is
really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9.

2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the argument = that
it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *opinion* t= he
right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHub= " applies
to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels = very close to
the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with a Bic = pen
when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true = of gitea,
gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives one tool=
prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do.

3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when people hap= pen
to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue track= er
to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal convenien= ce
-- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisio= ns get made in
the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this will end= up
with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker, and<= br> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions made.=

4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides to<= br> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or implicitly= )
disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git.

5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one when a<= br> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues be= tween
repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can't = transfer
an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they h= ave to be
(AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state (I may=
also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that talk= s about
migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version, and = what
should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at
www.github.com/wkumari/<document name> to
www.github.com/capport-wg/<document-name> - this involved= administrative
annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could see. = I
think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the
documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that moving t= he
repo entails.

Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: = maintain
a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub - b= ut I
really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the &q= uot;one true
way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model).



_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-gith= ub@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-= github
--000000000000c6da9c05a083e94e-- From nobody Tue Mar 10 11:07:49 2020 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 E9DF03A0771 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:07:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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=gmx.net 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 fhgevvu1nPwI for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:07:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (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 5050B3A0765 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:07:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1583863609; bh=JctSMHZHYQLXDLoH0ONc6noMMYXJ+UDH9novJXzStUc=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=LLA1EyQ+4JGWCCq1fFsNXZjqhwKKLOZV14Lwg/LFYYmwY7ecnlmM0q1gUhvm5d5nv lao+o9Zjkyrn+OKEuq1TVogEpz5jYVi7JZdKCGvjk1lk9zy7STcgPQwTbdThzES+kg xO44e+HnIhTPBLXvzTwxKmBXal+K5I0xi/z+6sq4= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [172.21.40.250] ([194.224.160.189]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MeCtj-1jirEt3DpH-00bMRG; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:06:49 +0100 To: Henrik Levkowetz , Alexandre Petrescu Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> <6774efc6-0071-5f8b-8007-8c6ab124c754@gmx.de> <73e036e7-7ce5-4bd5-1b42-f208c2eadc5b@levkowetz.com> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <64a8ca08-0e43-a5b4-9615-86908710d8be@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:06:42 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <73e036e7-7ce5-4bd5-1b42-f208c2eadc5b@levkowetz.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:+dMi9ueMSpgOxwSLqruZMxEhujJjXtE7ZMFBN2tm2UwfGWTPulY +AFfCERWh1Hz2ufNVG+GojCHC2RGnqtC1DVkt7aRVDSzGTwfGhyj1zGXRyQRMI2l/WWndo8 0tTi4FtEPcfs/XEoEOIDjzMffCGzaENQl71Th0v2IMb/wR1h+1QYSDhM15oQXoIJFjFyOgt WQWIx6oUO6htmu+eXIYHQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:1F+Sajxte7U=:Zfv4PAhnExwhAGqXHzq6q6 IgKjkpS7y2aYa2QfCBeurR+jKuCkL2qLIj3gfavcv+0z53dVSyq4OOrwFNTOVoOrh9B/SQNoz /2mxMqp6s5ntV78UuYVTyLahs+yjRRbODN/aMe00qFu2Z/rVNWOn5FTFo4byjkwilCUkQ5GA0 ScG2GgG/4tDDjfQcow9M8c66/awV/HM4jNlvCFRitHgahJCJPKxMApTGJJG52X1lw8zBX/aKL StIbjJzPjmx27VhxuIjKul4wpgl25ic2Es7hJSniWoupjz+zOcNNTefPNcq8iZ2BoZ6ZHYZg+ WkiGJcNPmkwwyih/xYA5bgn2ZUhvDhr7YTigbNIiX16YAwioEk0rI1vVeWMLAqVFgvIJ/ZIua mXtkxHxE4OR8ofaxRzPNOopORUnHCuuzPyjrierti3f/P0Y/Q8kp4mjA2rrlMKUDqBDmhEs/H L1YFjn4aIoYXKtqDq7qMnF3qddNRjPx3Cv4N9FJsNGdBJ0rEffGpxMvOpRYOdz1+k7WYoIW2H 271+z7hR4zOP8pYhjd217QNECDiTIcupdhCyAWdbh8N52hiUegHN1X0+XxeUityOllairUlwX hNWXFaLR+DqTvNNg5XB5bDvmgGTmdGwiZsZ+Ny+Nrbk3aW42OLEmXP4OQfydHDKWrnvh4LVU7 wLtodYtywn6YsqkGTQp5wnBYQQO2T/Cor5gLPVymD1P1CnPZ1EixrdmE4yilZ8ikwezyxYfJR 8tx4Ps3KfAiGWWXKTg4+iDwXyEJE2Uv1gmPiCkAdMhvAqBtkaK8iwQJGL7nVpeXixemsv4NEI J/kjfjrUAOErjyVsU60Bq6McBpjGDjLKXBC4Yk0oxn9cFbOu0OalgpWlVg3SCgFXxoUn5G8WW 335QhvZThZWiBFXQoyR0pk+pSFL7b45UPV7PolQJ5y/xFPcUYav6n73nKzglW9OuxSt7MTjGo 4kLu0PMr2H7QqLR1szoLGzX6yQI37ZqUud7K32lBTwp4oHQa/EVEt7KPdvr904wfywVTdvrPz PAcLfTwbRrcS/jOvIqCaFaJXOLdFsx9283uMaseR3HR55MDPN9Yv87KRN3SSZM1Dy7ghKCpLr Y3FW0pQQf2jPdMAqQsSw2OfqpJaZ0eZNJ4NEIDIs15tKmNC4VU/SWrz6+AECgl63KWGyhDsmt Hg0Z/VJ6AwyYxD6ZWuXou4UKIxO2Mwvh0eN6tvxy7lzouk7ngCMRyrFYqzi2KbmezNE/GR+ba Dw7OchB1MNnoOuL/x Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 18:07:48 -0000 On 10.03.2020 18:30, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Hi Alexandre, > > On 2020-03-10 17:32, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> I have tried to write people's names in the Ack section. "=C3=A4" beca= me >> "ae". Japanese characters got un-understandable - scrambled in a >> strange way. >> >> Then, from private feedback, I tried to put > (Ole Troan)."/> in the Ack section. >> >> The xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org complains this: >> Error: Unable to validate the XML document: INPUT >> : Line 1439: Element contact is not declared in t list of >> possible children >> : Line 1440: No declaration for element contact >> : Line 1440: No declaration for attribute fullname of elemen= t >> contact > > It looks as if you're running your XML through the v2 parser and formatt= er. > > To use the element you need to use the v3 parser and formatter= , > either by converting your v2 xml explicitly to v3 with 'xml2rfc --v2v3', > or by having it done on the fly by using the v3 switch 'xml2rfc --v3 ...= '. > > The legacy v2 parser and formatters knows nothing about the new v3 eleme= nts. Right. Also: would be an abuse of the element. Should be: . (That said, the ASCII version IMHO is not needed here anyway) Best regards, Julian From nobody Tue Mar 10 11:17:44 2020 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 8FDB03A07B3; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:17:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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 amgQA0PEjuUU; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (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 645C73A07A7; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48cNc21q9vz6G7gV; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:17:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1583864258; bh=Bb0Krhp9BBo9hchtgZIX0Vj3rm+lvpZDdUmy7RulCqw=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=JaEYIRt2ZA3uJmYiYirjT/F4BimwyS1dvv2tQE64SXTkC4XgTcZYrmCwvJR8s1rPY u0stuhlP/EhsApclb0rokAq8YR3F4vtTQuPcbjU/2Hsk1BJ15qIh5Kf1u0ZVpMIWZP Tn/958KiezePhVnVez76YWY9Iu60Hb5KuoPSrjZM= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net Received: from [192.168.128.43] (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 maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48cNc14j09z6G7Js; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:17:37 -0700 (PDT) To: Eric Rescorla Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> From: "Joel M. Halpern" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:17:34 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 18:17:41 -0000 While I personally think this document should be approved (even though I have 0 desire to use github), I think we should be careful about what lens we use in looking at concerns. In particular, the discuss-criteria document does not deal with process documents. As written, if one were being a literalist, one would probably conclude that no AD could put a DISCUSS on any clear process document that made it thought IEtF last call. While one might argue that would be good, I am quite certain that was not the intent when the IESG adopted those rules. Personally, I would like the ADs to be able to use judgment when reviewing process documents, just as they do with technical documents. Yours, Joel On 3/10/2020 2:01 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > Hi Warren, > > I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but > before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies > to this DISCUSS? > > -Ekr > > > [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/ > > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker > > wrote: > > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering > me enough > that I'm changing it to a discuss. > > This feels like additional centralization / control / process, > without good > justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with > discussion / > agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents include > something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github at > https://github.com/wkumari/.  The most recent  version > of the > document, open issues, and so on should all be available there.  The > authors > gratefully accept pull requests. ]" > > This document contains a lot of text about setting up, > administering, etc a WG > organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I > could find) > on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use > GitHub (because > it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. > If WG > documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can > find it, and > we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having > control and > process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. > > I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: > 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for > working > groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: > "Whether > working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to > support their > work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document > does let > WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" > way. I > happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and > use that > to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, > imposing our > working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long > at it can be > turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" > paradigm for a > reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be > entirely > their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is > wrong - and a > BCP does that... > > The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will > not alter the > Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work > within it." > but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: > "Working > Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being > managed on > Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has > always been > clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this > doesn't change > it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes > more > places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place > where is is > really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. > > 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the > argument that > it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my > *opinion* the > right one for us to use), but there are many places where term > "GitHub" applies > to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels > very close to > the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with > a Bic pen > when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: > "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of > gitea, > gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives > one tool > prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. > > 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when > people happen > to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the > issue tracker > to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal > convenience > -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions > get made in > the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this > will end up > with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue > tracker, and > those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the > decisions made. > > 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG > decides to > fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or > implicitly) > disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. > > 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one > when a > document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues > between > repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You > can't transfer > an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they > have to be > (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state > (I may > also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that > talks about > migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted > version, and what > should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at > www.github.com/wkumari/ name> to > www.github.com/capport-wg/ > - this involved > administrative > annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I > could see. I > think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the > documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that > moving the > repo entails. > > Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, > b: maintain > a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in > GitHub - but I > really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the > "one true > way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Tue Mar 10 11:28:27 2020 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 7F0A53A07F0 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:28:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 RZZhFDRG3cHV for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:28:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com (mail-lj1-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::234]) (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 6DDBC3A07F6 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:28:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id a10so15295595ljp.11 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:28:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=D7L0TuiWM7WkoD+qy7sU4y9oaXaEReHn6ZYENLdrmjI=; b=TXyKEHD5g6COQVT3iHERCCHMs+sulow2KxhKIUK28Z6rfG14jQleA7LeTn1TDbX2tZ WeiQpNqWWffyGGW+7WY81PcoW7FbaJtEwcieAgt0GjXvkbkRCkSUD1sy0smcncHerdgs 8xfkvQitAtb59YQQKe1k0WSjB35ru9UsoMiFUy2C2P8aym1FxpvI5n4iydmCKXIgcyBw x7kpO2VyPSQljyolC819I0ce4iIs9H/W54mM0YFh+HrbbXmMMXJBo7tIk6y3pgyg23+C 0/IqN3T+ezYrHcgLwpwxliYWpPoGhDetgtWg21ObMdi5ADwEW/Xz4d3Ee6MmuOrzj9H/ QIRg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=D7L0TuiWM7WkoD+qy7sU4y9oaXaEReHn6ZYENLdrmjI=; b=PHaV1HCsLUp/AwTGTYokrJ5jy3P7I0UioX2Eei/V6FGfoZ3V99A+uHaBjmK0eAMf1R doYzS5ARdl+suVAVTYhRDarqOzM5GK+HsfIA+tndhw7e9FSwsNUPlIxZcNtirCPuCzZ2 AI1+e1X6VfEvbc+qKw9iD/wkzzpvwMcyUwhP2gujGY4gTN6coAL6DvvQ4mQ+QvD/RfkU hl/x8ZUlM0iaY4VMfABXXqTdnX1xORARHd/Rd9mQZpSMTveS0VDOavywegz+ZUFmO02j 7Q0RFQs/SZiXwThPyefR92f/LqDDw8C87LPy+kmUjDhSv42ok0/1wU+y4a2jGzKgtVLl Nzxg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2AvS2k9kueQibe4shLUqefUr6Pp+o9s41+lrVTUMA1l2P+ziy4 y8qBmCqZ7TMNp0qSSOwpSqL/6df9awCcuaytP1G74cEVEURFvA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvKoyznmwT2ORdv95P6RPqsT53ErH8DLk13Grlip4/0EAb/S6QefzsarJUR842uBeUxXG3YEdZHivAARiNF+fo= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b5a5:: with SMTP id f5mr13244487ljn.162.1583864893567; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:28:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Eric Rescorla Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:27:36 -0700 Message-ID: To: "Joel M. Halpern" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005a877d05a084482a" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 18:28:22 -0000 --0000000000005a877d05a084482a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 11:17 AM Joel M. Halpern wrote: > While I personally think this document should be approved (even though I > have 0 desire to use github), I think we should be careful about what > lens we use in looking at concerns. > In particular, the discuss-criteria document does not deal with process > documents. This seems like a legitimate perspective, but when I read the DISCUSS criteria, it seems to say that they apply to "Protocol Actions" and this document is listed in the Protocol Action section of the IESG Agenda (this is confirmed by the draft announcement) [0]. So, if the IESG (or Warren) wants to say that they don't think that the DISCUSS Criteria apply to process BCPs, that seems like the place to start. As written, if one were being a literalist, one would > probably conclude that no AD could put a DISCUSS on any clear process > document that made it thought IEtF last call. > I actually read this differently, which is that the DISCUSS criteria don't apply at all to !Protocol actions and so ADs are free to DISCUSS for any reason. However, for the reason above, I think that the DISCUSS Criteria do apply here. -Ekr [0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ > > While one might argue that would be good, I am quite certain that was > not the intent when the IESG adopted those rules. Personally, I would > like the ADs to be able to use judgment when reviewing process > documents, just as they do with technical documents. > > Yours, > Joel > > On 3/10/2020 2:01 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Hi Warren, > > > > I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but > > before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies > > to this DISCUSS? > > > > -Ekr > > > > > > [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/ > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker > > > wrote: > > > > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut > this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to > > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > DISCUSS: > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering > > me enough > > that I'm changing it to a discuss. > > > > This feels like additional centralization / control / process, > > without good > > justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with > > discussion / > > agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents > include > > something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github > at > > https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version > > of the > > document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. The > > authors > > gratefully accept pull requests. ]" > > > > This document contains a lot of text about setting up, > > administering, etc a WG > > organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I > > could find) > > on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use > > GitHub (because > > it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. > > If WG > > documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can > > find it, and > > we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having > > control and > > process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. > > > > I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: > > 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for > > working > > groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: > > "Whether > > working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to > > support their > > work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document > > does let > > WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" > > way. I > > happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and > > use that > > to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, > > imposing our > > working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long > > at it can be > > turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" > > paradigm for a > > reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be > > entirely > > their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is > > wrong - and a > > BCP does that... > > > > The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will > > not alter the > > Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work > > within it." > > but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: > > "Working > > Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being > > managed on > > Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has > > always been > > clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this > > doesn't change > > it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes > > more > > places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place > > where is is > > really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. > > > > 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the > > argument that > > it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my > > *opinion* the > > right one for us to use), but there are many places where term > > "GitHub" applies > > to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels > > very close to > > the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with > > a Bic pen > > when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one > example: > > "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of > > gitea, > > gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives > > one tool > > prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. > > > > 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when > > people happen > > to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the > > issue tracker > > to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal > > convenience > > -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions > > get made in > > the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this > > will end up > > with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue > > tracker, and > > those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the > > decisions made. > > > > 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG > > decides to > > fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or > > implicitly) > > disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. > > > > 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one > > when a > > document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues > > between > > repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You > > can't transfer > > an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they > > have to be > > (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state > > (I may > > also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that > > talks about > > migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted > > version, and what > > should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at > > www.github.com/wkumari/ > name> to > > www.github.com/capport-wg/ > > - this involved > > administrative > > annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I > > could see. I > > think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep > the > > documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that > > moving the > > repo entails. > > > > Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, > > b: maintain > > a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in > > GitHub - but I > > really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the > > "one true > > way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > --0000000000005a877d05a084482a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 11:17 AM Joel M. Halpern = <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrot= e:
While I perso= nally think this document should be approved (even though I
have 0 desire to use github), I think we should be careful about what
lens we use in looking at concerns.
In particular, the discuss-criteria document does not deal with process documents.=C2=A0

This seems like a le= gitimate perspective, but when I read the DISCUSS criteria, it seems to say= that they apply to "Protocol Actions"=C2=A0 and this document is= listed in the Protocol Action section of the IESG Agenda (this is confirme= d by the draft announcement) [0]. So, if the IESG (or Warren) wants to say = that they don't think that the DISCUSS Criteria apply to process BCPs, = that seems like the place to start.

As written, if one were being a litera= list, one would
probably conclude that no AD could put a DISCUSS on any clear process
document that made it thought IEtF last call.

I actually read this differently, which is that the DISCUSS criteria= don't apply at all to !Protocol actions and so ADs are free to DISCUSS= for any reason. However, for the reason above, I think that the DISCUSS Cr= iteria do apply here.

-Ekr

<= /div>

While one might argue that would be good, I am quite certain that was
not the intent when the IESG adopted those rules.=C2=A0 Personally, I would=
like the ADs to be able to use judgment when reviewing process
documents, just as they do with technical documents.

Yours,
Joel

On 3/10/2020 2:01 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Hi Warren,
>
> I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, b= ut
> before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think appli= es
> to this DISCUSS?
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> [0] https://ietf.org/about/= groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker
> <noreply@ietf= .org <mailto:n= oreply@ietf.org>> wrote:
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot posi= tion for
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0When responding, please keep the subject line intac= t and reply to all
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (F= eel free to cut this
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Please refer to
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.ietf.or= g/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT= positions.
>
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0The document, along with other ballot positions, ca= n be found here:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://datatra= cker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/
>
>
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0---------------------------------------------------= -------------------
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0DISCUSS:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0---------------------------------------------------= -------------------
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has= been) bothering
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0me enough
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0that I'm changing it to a discuss.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0This feels like additional centralization / control= / process,
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0without good
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0justification. I happen to use GitHub for my docume= nts (along with
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0discussion /
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. = Our documents include
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0something like: "[ This document is being coll= aborated on in Github at
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://github.com/wkumari/<draft-name>= .=C2=A0 The most recent=C2=A0 version
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0of the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0document, open issues, and so on should all be avai= lable there.=C2=A0 The
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0authors
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0gratefully accept pull requests. ]"
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0This document contains a lot of text about setting = up,
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0administering, etc a WG
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0organization / repos -- but there is no good justif= ication (that I
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0could find)
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0on what advantages this has over simply encouraging= people use
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0GitHub (because
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in = their own repos.
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0If WG
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0documents include a pointer (like above) to the rep= o, everyone can
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0find it, and
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-cr= eep / chairs having
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0control and
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn'= ;t helpful.
>
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0---------------------------------------------------= -------------------
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0COMMENT:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0---------------------------------------------------= -------------------
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain an= d DISCUSS.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A01: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is th= e "right" way for
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0working
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0groups to manage themselves and documents streams. = The charter says:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"Whether
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0working groups choose to use GitHub or the document= ed policies to
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0support their
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0work will remain entirely at their discretion."= ; - while the document
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0does let
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that thi= s is the "best"
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0way. I
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0happen to put documents that I author in git (hoste= d on GitHub), and
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0use that
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our= * choice,
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0imposing our
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0working process on others is a mistake - we have us= ed the "as long
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0at it can be
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0turned into the canonical format we don't care = how you make it"
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0paradigm for a
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is= , and should be
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0entirely
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0their decision - telling people that the "righ= t" editor is vi is
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0wrong - and a
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0BCP does that...
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0The charter also says: "The documents produced= by this group will
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0not alter the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will descr= ibe how to work
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0within it."
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0but the document sails very close to the wind in ma= ny places - e.g:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"Working
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-= Draft being
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0managed on
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Github at any time, in consultation with document e= ditors." It has
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0always been
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0clear that chairs can request revisions to WG docum= ents; this
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0doesn't change
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies = the water / makes
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0more
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an= example place
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0where is is
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0really dangerous - and I think comes close to tryin= g to change BCP9.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A02: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortabl= e -- I get the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0argument that
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0it is the standard / best known hosted git provider= (and, in my
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0*opinion* the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0right one for us to use), but there are many places= where term
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"GitHub" applies
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / = Gitea / etc. This feels
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0very close to
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the= blue-sheets with
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0a Bic pen
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0when all we need is some sort of writing implement.= Just as one example:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"GitHub facilitates more involved interactions= ,..." this is true of
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0gitea,
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling o= ut GitHub gives
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0one tool
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to d= o.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A03: We require that all decisions be made on mailing= lists - when
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0people happen
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happe= n to use the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0issue tracker
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0to track issues, it is clear that this is just for = their personal
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0convenience
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0-- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to= instances where decisions
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0get made in
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mail= ing list - this
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0will end up
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0with two classes of users: those that keep checking= the issue
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0tracker, and
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0those that follow the mailing list and are surprise= d by the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0decisions made.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A04: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning cur= ve - if a WG
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0decides to
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either = explicitly or
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0implicitly)
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0disenfranchises people who don't use or want to= use git.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A05: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal = repo to a WG one
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0when a
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can= only transfer issues
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0between
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0repositories owned by the same user or organization= account. You
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0can't transfer
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0an issue from a private repository to a public repo= sitory." and they
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0have to be
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead= to loss of state
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(I may
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere i= n the document that
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0talks about
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0migrating a document / repo from an individual to a= WG hosted
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0version, and what
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0should happen). I have a document which moved from = hosted at
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0www.github.com/wkumari/ <http://ww= w.github.com/wkumari/><document
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0name> to
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0www.github.com/capport-wg/
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<http://www.github.com/capport-wg/&g= t;<document-name> - this involved
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0administrative
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no be= nefit that I
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0could see. I
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0think a much much better approach would be have peo= ple simple keep the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0documents in their personal repos and not have the = disruption that
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0moving the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0repo entails.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my= own gitea instance,
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0b: maintain
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of= my drafts in
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0GitHub - but I
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0really don't think that the IETF should be impl= ying that this is the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"one true
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model)= .
>
>
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0_______________________________________________
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Ietf-and-github mailing list
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Ietf-and-github@ietf.org <mailto:Ietf-and-github@ietf.org>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.ietf.org/ma= ilman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-and-github mailing list
> Ietf-and= -github@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iet= f-and-github
>
--0000000000005a877d05a084482a-- From nobody Tue Mar 10 11:37:39 2020 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 B674C3A086D for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:37:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BshNfwtlwQ_x for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:37:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-x12f.google.com (mail-lf1-x12f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12f]) (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 DA09A3A0854 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:37:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12f.google.com with SMTP id i10so11764667lfg.11 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:37:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=P87+is8VowLYAugGDjwK8kcbe1lDZ60/LJuGRTtHkeY=; b=pGaRpdXICu6Q90+ptE7C2/VzPoBbJGPbS1M+6DmTu2tYQtyqxWzOtMZ8YWGH9yuNuw H1A9lSPl5JcvXIHcFPxw5/YT0bjEf2SDxr5eqKNbXaP2xrRRkfqBn0xSZ9fmRChqglEV lNjHQo7s+DGoePg4he1Gf6MkOURXTN7Elay0v9I0P1kYd9zR/rbivFS55vePadkf6VLa maH0kub8ku3VPA8nr3/TISIkELhjsP9LJEFbln/b9fogpl6bX7+Wz+PifXwkvE+2hyxX QP0GILLfyr5WIC89y1PTKXkGVCyfC9Ti18A6lrA2ifKwoDJMN8JmUAOWzgN76iyvL4+s BM4w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=P87+is8VowLYAugGDjwK8kcbe1lDZ60/LJuGRTtHkeY=; b=cxaPT4x01lyz3MccwMErc/3/d5J2oRmbLASypIHUMo15vXoNWgYcwKPgF3x555kSl7 ypn6tMa4Z49ZH376RfjGyHaY33eCmnjOzryi3kLhOd5F17gcS4qtgSr/vkFoZtrtpK5b ZzAcWYQmWhBRa2NDRkywBVeTGM5lzpr+571r6oGbw09SHzP5q6WrQdQWwOuMT8V1D4Mj 40O0PSXESd6IJUh0pj6isJgk3TEqyhCDylebhDcI/TkXbStVsWjCjB5tBoQLut94JL9G ECVIza+dpnHmnDQj3h4kb1tkoxduZD150WKDmA2lGIB+QgkoxabQpLsUxsyt+vXv3iAE IwJg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0IIFHvAKbiO5w6kG4CVHvpEZeIGJvySMR4kUVw81R2qxrATiFB 1EvvLkDkaI6BOYjdwGRGfm8M7MaLPapQDZGSoKKuiw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtNqxljdMInqhTbqZqOJDHXCyvChwMTswF46hIXRlQ00jBY1DWCD/oSDTf290+/uygW3Gz0jUV4iSqHte9PJ1Y= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4565:: with SMTP id k5mr3823556lfm.8.1583865445554; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:37:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Warren Kumari Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:36:48 -0400 Message-ID: To: Eric Rescorla Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 18:37:38 -0000 I'm going to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.". W On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Hi Warren, > > I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies to this DISCUSS? > > -Ekr > > > [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/ > > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote: >> >> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss >> >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this >> introductory paragraph, however.) >> >> >> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> DISCUSS: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering me enough >> that I'm changing it to a discuss. >> >> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, without good >> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with discussion / >> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents include >> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github at >> https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version of the >> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. The authors >> gratefully accept pull requests. ]" >> >> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administering, etc a WG >> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I could find) >> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use GitHub (because >> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. If WG >> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can find it, and >> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having control and >> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. >> >> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: >> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for working >> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: "Whether >> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their >> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document does let >> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" way. I >> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and use that >> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing our >> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at it can be >> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" paradigm for a >> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be entirely >> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wrong - and a >> BCP does that... >> >> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not alter the >> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it." >> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: "Working >> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being managed on >> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has always been >> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't change >> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes more >> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place where is is >> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. >> >> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the argument that >> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *opinion* the >> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHub" applies >> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels very close to >> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with a Bic pen >> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: >> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of gitea, >> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives one tool >> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. >> >> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when people happen >> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue tracker >> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal convenience >> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions get made in >> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this will end up >> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker, and >> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions made. >> >> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides to >> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or implicitly) >> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. >> >> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one when a >> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues between >> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can't transfer >> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they have to be >> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state (I may >> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that talks about >> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version, and what >> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at >> www.github.com/wkumari/ to >> www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administrative >> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could see. I >> think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the >> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that moving the >> repo entails. >> >> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: maintain >> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub - but I >> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the "one true >> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Tue Mar 10 11:39:17 2020 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 068383A0832; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:39:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=xrBwLVY3; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=EnIPUwNa 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 0Drjh0JZb168; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47D993A0828; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD0C2207D; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:39:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:39:12 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=e ShZVAFfzEhZW/sw8MorgfZspgVJjVK2nIkbx1S2nOU=; b=xrBwLVY3oZeIL6MnS 0/Pfk02b7y5odDweNDvD5lbyzNvACh8jq0aNc7jvAbWu1xgCBTWG2sHiQC/5e4pJ CVQMgpek+5FhKrixsTnTqkBwduDmmiMHWEiPTLhcsClaLSkQqwz6WQI7UxHIIdE6 KKq78P6gL2ayPTyXoOHKYy6nGqa3+8QLz6XADvA6SK+4rkBkpRxpJezccKAiedtx uka6z43UsQh7aFfQuSW7L8eyRuHgH5X5G4osuJ/H6KW+l12ZfVq/wD+wNJC3u014 N3HrGtWUlFJNkMjhWEVe+YwFIQeB6JRG1z+1Va3JgBek8mMgpyDaCurr3dB4fBq1 +rtJg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=eShZVAFfzEhZW/sw8MorgfZspgVJjVK2nIkbx1S2n OU=; b=EnIPUwNaMWXzycEU04HUEjiQq+36xEeaRDeqYKM54pK+m2hpO+TwGLUjv HloqZcRAqF9rCg5T5noRLlH+LAwv4gTgjJ3ognyL8guxJpsmwGU7/ap+mkiv8gz2 g11Aov/6NckYyI+eGcEe/LJ4qNuBzjX4UR6N5s3aMxbUr9KmamLVOr+D6Qh5Slqy nXEafq+GBwwmFLFvR5+kSFyaaXb6bfHSxNNU7rBgj5MNOflHGMVrrHe2Xn+RQjQp jBExQ5uy4z2+hKf4v5RzVvcJMQ00jPfTkSzNEz0yXJmt6qXvYdN/6oxiVMGDYmx2 E9fj8f0rztCmU3FmIBhMujNlNQ9Uw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvtddguddtjecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhi shhsrgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuffhomh grihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghdpghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecukfhppedujeefrdefkedr uddujedrledunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homheprghlihhsshgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.91]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5CB653060F09; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:39:11 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:39:09 -0400 Cc: Eric Rescorla , draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Warren Kumari X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 18:39:16 -0000 Isn=E2=80=99t this really an objection to the entire WG and its charter, = and not to this document specifically? Alissa > On Mar 10, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: >=20 > I'm going to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but > this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for > DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.". >=20 > W >=20 > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: >>=20 >> Hi Warren, >>=20 >> I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but = before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies = to this DISCUSS? >>=20 >> -Ekr >>=20 >>=20 >> [0] = https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/ >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for >>> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss >>>=20 >>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to = all >>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this >>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> DISCUSS: >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>=20 >>> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering = me enough >>> that I'm changing it to a discuss. >>>=20 >>> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, = without good >>> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with = discussion / >>> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents = include >>> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github = at >>> https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version = of the >>> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. The = authors >>> gratefully accept pull requests. ]" >>>=20 >>> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, = administering, etc a WG >>> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I = could find) >>> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use = GitHub (because >>> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. = If WG >>> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can = find it, and >>> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having = control and >>> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> COMMENT: >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>=20 >>> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. >>>=20 >>> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: >>> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for = working >>> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: = "Whether >>> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to = support their >>> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document = does let >>> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" = way. I >>> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and = use that >>> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, = imposing our >>> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long = at it can be >>> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" = paradigm for a >>> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be = entirely >>> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is = wrong - and a >>> BCP does that... >>>=20 >>> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will = not alter the >>> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work = within it." >>> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: = "Working >>> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being = managed on >>> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has = always been >>> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this = doesn't change >>> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes = more >>> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place = where is is >>> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. >>>=20 >>> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the = argument that >>> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my = *opinion* the >>> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term = "GitHub" applies >>> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels = very close to >>> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with = a Bic pen >>> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one = example: >>> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of = gitea, >>> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives = one tool >>> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. >>>=20 >>> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when = people happen >>> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the = issue tracker >>> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal = convenience >>> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions = get made in >>> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this = will end up >>> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue = tracker, and >>> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the = decisions made. >>>=20 >>> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG = decides to >>> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or = implicitly) >>> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. >>>=20 >>> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one = when a >>> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues = between >>> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You = can't transfer >>> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they = have to be >>> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state = (I may >>> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that = talks about >>> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted = version, and what >>> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at >>> www.github.com/wkumari/ to >>> www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved = administrative >>> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I = could see. I >>> think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep = the >>> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that = moving the >>> repo entails. >>>=20 >>> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, = b: maintain >>> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in = GitHub - but I >>> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the = "one true >>> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > idea in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > of pants. > ---maf >=20 From nobody Tue Mar 10 11:48:05 2020 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 ACD353A0850 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 mO156mhH9WCW for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-x133.google.com (mail-lf1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::133]) (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 602A53A0851 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x133.google.com with SMTP id q9so5149786lfc.10 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=nfh/uQ26rJLtQD5RYfk4L62sNp9QTinnrFH7ap3SMVo=; b=G3dAboR8YP69N42TXaQxfcZG2tAFSkUkBiv8R00z0UGRyqtLWxWnvwXmypowr0EVI4 1xW8M8PQN/yfRUn332577zBTDD4Rdi13ofiWTJdKiMCRS1E9IYU2eIBgT4gnDHQyCgCx 5mIc43RDnHWjzDoSqQg8nfUMoyE8z+6kXafW6sowLYqDmOeUcxkRlSQFd567N9z2VQwl htyFs0o8WXi3coDUaSVv0GV1mAPFPGQ15Qb8loiRB1M48ffMO6pvFkErgcAqe0PTNm2A eYARA/+Z6F98xVlSyhb76OJRYIBArGjOSsSrfAz5hjdv67PC12ywHM/Jz6RyhjmC3rxB fiRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=nfh/uQ26rJLtQD5RYfk4L62sNp9QTinnrFH7ap3SMVo=; b=saaETgZZ8I+0AfvYYLEZBMlJtdN1PBHkLabSNGTKkksXYt5Rdd25d0EgP6SWZH6A5a pqFvlGJXynQ/+kOaWoaFMgjHzIpojAY2RQGWdYfii6DVMi56g23nJaHDUQa94W6ci6l4 aNBNlWyaIT3/OS3Q5zWry8cL3gM+TLsVcuVlOZ9p4hDHHUJLIwNAanRioR2qUuwN20O0 TvWOsNoTDO3fpftNLvKa+gmYPfHj2wwQOTr+J4hDuVP1SPc0FjZ0+M1CL8fB2O9l/DlG xLFGe7JatzlM4j3mGafpL7UXV7lBPoItIu5le9DMhi1wlYr/F7kGYp1gESaPwrgkd5eR XZtA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2EcmTZgGsbv8amnOp7JE8MqNbO6xsgXWn1sKPAS4I+mErV3e3t ONox639DZEDuAR/B1k7+uaVAZJpQetUtVJI3CEYUxw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsvIe0fpGfAcglJpmjvMiYsd0+FCDKrVB24Yv0iHdLai84uPGZESwgYE8DMJVB5i4KA7f9JOETgJ+R8ovN7IVQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:1041:: with SMTP id c1mr13602159lfb.14.1583866073430; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Eric Rescorla Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:47:16 -0700 Message-ID: To: Warren Kumari Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000addcad05a0848ef7" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 18:48:00 -0000 --000000000000addcad05a0848ef7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Warren, Thanks for your response. While it's true that the list cannot be exhaustive, it seems to me that your DISCUSS comments pretty clearly fall within the "non-criteria" bucket, specifically "Disagreement with informed WG decisions that do not exhibit problems outlined in Section 3.1 (DISCUSS Criteria) . In other words, disagreement in preferences among technically sound approaches." and potentially "Reiteration of the issues that have been raised and discussed as part of WG or IETF Last Call, unless the AD believes they have not been properly addressed." I note that the non-criteria do not contain the escape hatch you cite here, but rather say clearly: "None of the following are criteria for which the IESG should DISCUSS a document; though they might reasonably form the basis of a non-blocking comment on a document." -Ekr On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 11:37 AM Warren Kumari wrote: > I'm going to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but > this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for > DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.". > > W > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > Hi Warren, > > > > I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but > before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies to > this DISCUSS? > > > > -Ekr > > > > > > [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/ > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker < > noreply@ietf.org> wrote: > >> > >> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > >> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss > >> > >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > >> introductory paragraph, however.) > >> > >> > >> Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > >> > >> > >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ > >> > >> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> DISCUSS: > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering me > enough > >> that I'm changing it to a discuss. > >> > >> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, without > good > >> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with > discussion / > >> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents include > >> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github at > >> https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version of > the > >> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. The > authors > >> gratefully accept pull requests. ]" > >> > >> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administering, > etc a WG > >> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I > could find) > >> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use GitHub > (because > >> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. If > WG > >> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can find > it, and > >> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having > control and > >> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. > >> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> COMMENT: > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. > >> > >> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: > >> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for > working > >> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: > "Whether > >> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to > support their > >> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document > does let > >> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" way. > I > >> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and > use that > >> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing > our > >> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at > it can be > >> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" > paradigm for a > >> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be > entirely > >> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wrong > - and a > >> BCP does that... > >> > >> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not > alter the > >> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work > within it." > >> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: > "Working > >> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being managed > on > >> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has > always been > >> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't > change > >> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes > more > >> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place where > is is > >> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. > >> > >> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the > argument that > >> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my > *opinion* the > >> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHub" > applies > >> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels very > close to > >> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with a > Bic pen > >> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: > >> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of > gitea, > >> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives one > tool > >> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. > >> > >> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when people > happen > >> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue > tracker > >> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal > convenience > >> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions get > made in > >> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this will > end up > >> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker, > and > >> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions > made. > >> > >> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides > to > >> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or > implicitly) > >> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. > >> > >> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one > when a > >> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues > between > >> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can't > transfer > >> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they > have to be > >> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state (I > may > >> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that > talks about > >> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version, > and what > >> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at > >> www.github.com/wkumari/ to > >> www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved > administrative > >> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could > see. I > >> think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the > >> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that > moving the > >> repo entails. > >> > >> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: > maintain > >> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub > - but I > >> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the > "one true > >> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > -- > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > idea in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > of pants. > ---maf > --000000000000addcad05a0848ef7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Warren,

Thanks for your resp= onse. While it's true that the list cannot be exhaustive, it seems to m= e that your DISCUSS comments pretty clearly fall within the "non-crite= ria" bucket, specifically

"Disagreement = with informed WG decisions that do not exhibit problems outlined in Section=C2=A03.1 (DISCUSS Criteria). In other words, = disagreement in preferences among technically sound approaches."
=

and potentially

"Reiterat= ion of the issues that have been raised and discussed as part of WG or IETF Last Call, unless the AD believes they have not been=20 properly addressed."

I note that the non-crit= eria do not contain the escape hatch you cite here, but rather say clearly:=
"None of the following are criteria for which the IESG shou= ld DISCUSS a=20 document; though they might reasonably form the basis of a non-blocking=20 comment on a document."

-Ekr




On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 11:37 AM Warren K= umari <warren@kumari.net> wr= ote:
I'm goi= ng to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but
this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for
DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.".

W

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Warren,
>
> I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, b= ut before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies= to this DISCUSS?
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> [0] https://ietf.org/about/= groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>= wrote:
>>
>> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss
>>
>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to = all
>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut= this
>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>>
>>
>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.o= rg/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>>
>>
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here= :
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/d= oc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ----
>> DISCUSS:
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ----
>>
>> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) botherin= g me enough
>> that I'm changing it to a discuss.
>>
>> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, wit= hout good
>> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with= discussion /
>> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents i= nclude
>> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in = Github at
>> https://github.com/wkumari/<draft-name>.=C2=A0 The mo= st recent=C2=A0 version of the
>> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there.=C2= =A0 The authors
>> gratefully accept pull requests. ]"
>>
>> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administeri= ng, etc a WG
>> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I= could find)
>> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use Git= Hub (because
>> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos= . If WG
>> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can= find it, and
>> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs ha= ving control and
>> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ----
>> COMMENT:
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ----
>>
>> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS.
>>
>> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document:
>> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right&q= uot; way for working
>> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter say= s: "Whether
>> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to = support their
>> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the d= ocument does let
>> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "= best" way. I
>> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), a= nd use that
>> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, impos= ing our
>> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as= long at it can be
>> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it= " paradigm for a
>> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be= entirely
>> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor = is vi is wrong - and a
>> BCP does that...
>>
>> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group = will not alter the
>> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work= within it."
>> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g= : "Working
>> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being man= aged on
>> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." I= t has always been
>> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this does= n't change
>> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / mak= es more
>> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place = where is is
>> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP= 9.
>>
>> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the = argument that
>> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *o= pinion* the
>> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term &qu= ot;GitHub" applies
>> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. Th= is feels very close to
>> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets wi= th a Bic pen
>> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one ex= ample:
>> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this= is true of gitea,
>> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives= one tool
>> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do.
>>
>> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when p= eople happen
>> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the is= sue tracker
>> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal = convenience
>> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances wher= e decisions get made in
>> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this= will end up
>> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue trac= ker, and
>> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisi= ons made.
>>
>> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG de= cides to
>> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or i= mplicitly)
>> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git.
>>
>> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG on= e when a
>> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer = issues between
>> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You c= an't transfer
>> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." a= nd they have to be
>> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of sta= te (I may
>> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document = that talks about
>> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted vers= ion, and what
>> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at
>> www.github.com/wkumari/<document name> to
>> www.github.com/capport-wg/<document-name> - this= involved administrative
>> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I co= uld see. I
>> think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep= the
>> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that= moving the
>> repo entails.
>>
>> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea inst= ance, b: maintain
>> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in G= itHub - but I
>> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this = is the "one true
>> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model).
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf-and-github mailing list
>> Ietf= -and-github@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/= ietf-and-github



--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0---maf
--000000000000addcad05a0848ef7-- From nobody Tue Mar 10 11:52:29 2020 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 067753A0867 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:52:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fy_gz1qEhbha for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:52:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com (mail-lj1-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::234]) (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 EB0583A0864 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:52:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id q19so15390867ljp.9 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:52:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wPfzBV3AZbF/k8WUEqSH+1R25qr3HuWXiHRnU8Pi3iQ=; b=gRezrF92O8RRYcqUo654guN0SJh3LxwpiCqpIySwzayITuIOEsXjRrlj7/WUbwLpAo i/ROPAPjt4Ot7i2aA7/+ytoXB7FQ9O0tHSZfhWA+OHsI12SlGMwW7rQOhZC915p/fdPF JKgF4eVixKC2e0/8c0wb9QYjOwCS4Fe22tLY/SbqY8ctHFnCNWid7azp3jsQLnr7bo30 +6/m5pjEReuyHHeHZ8MY97+zWuK5OXqqo9H7Jkk6akgNCqRXTwZC/uvZXp2S7lpFpdFx xeENAVD4bEkz/Rg6bZSHDjqmE/ALNNaJMvYCijO9T69nGf3YEIXzCtttiwSB+YBJ5zNi AIbw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wPfzBV3AZbF/k8WUEqSH+1R25qr3HuWXiHRnU8Pi3iQ=; b=dyb+0fobPwV+w0s/6kZNtGW3xVu46A6WxDQO2ZxjQIx2yjEsRu/DEct5PJfHGOBbB0 yOQ19KfAGKWkUbbJOwGMCAG4apXdZKvZk0run1W7jHmiVNdKELgORnkNGpdzQNJAzF3X 863stCYe6uX1fNOqwD/k6BlK1bgQ0GCWd5cFkvKVz962v4MpnCfc3PTESfYhAbL5mEgs uhLsgpwuFK7p6kmtWrsgZVLAXorDN0sQtpyJ5r9Y1mZs/5C5ByTYUQprLqVYugI8c36/ ROY4kVs5WH+RkUwAWz/t5fV/mmMqBzrqTWyRVB25It732OLyAXTrA4WHVYmIGLMuTjR6 pnsA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ19F87pSm/NLZissoVcPTz988+4vxHVYRSjPSqL/ps2RK1l4ecp uiP9jQ7ihsOgzlM5tGLPCLHK3YPJpY1TfKkVLwBuDQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vu5tAjtE3vnIqVRGIIBVVt7Xiy2X1srbDYrYhtRXGd7Q0QUE7r1oBfyGABjsIDajZyWgbe7Dwidzbmy28xCwPs= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a366:: with SMTP id i6mr12154796ljn.198.1583866342665; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:52:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Warren Kumari Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:51:46 -0400 Message-ID: To: Alissa Cooper Cc: Eric Rescorla , draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 18:52:28 -0000 On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:39 PM Alissa Cooper wrote: > > Isn=E2=80=99t this really an objection to the entire WG and its charter, = and not to this document specifically? Not really, but I will grant you that it is close... A document which explained how to manage discussion between working group mailing lists and GitHub issues and pull requests; how text contributions are expected to be made; labeling and naming conventions; maintaining readable draft snapshots; using tooling and automation; informing participants about IETF policies; and other information would be useful -- but this does more than that - it pushes a (fairly) complex solution, and implies that it is the best practice. All of the above could still happen with documents at www.github.com/billy-joe-bob, not www.github.com/ietf-important-wg, with much less faff, and putting chairs in a "special" position. W > > Alissa > > > > On Mar 10, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: > > > > I'm going to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but > > this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for > > DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.". > > > > W > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> > >> Hi Warren, > >> > >> I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but b= efore I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies to = this DISCUSS? > >> > >> -Ekr > >> > >> > >> [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteri= a/ > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote: > >>> > >>> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > >>> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss > >>> > >>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > >>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut th= is > >>> introductory paragraph, however.) > >>> > >>> > >>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.= html > >>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > >>> > >>> > >>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------= - > >>> DISCUSS: > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------= - > >>> > >>> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering m= e enough > >>> that I'm changing it to a discuss. > >>> > >>> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, withou= t good > >>> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with di= scussion / > >>> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents incl= ude > >>> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github a= t > >>> https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version of= the > >>> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. The = authors > >>> gratefully accept pull requests. ]" > >>> > >>> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administering,= etc a WG > >>> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I co= uld find) > >>> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use GitHub= (because > >>> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos. I= f WG > >>> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can fi= nd it, and > >>> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having co= ntrol and > >>> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. > >>> > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------= - > >>> COMMENT: > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------= - > >>> > >>> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. > >>> > >>> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: > >>> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for = working > >>> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: = "Whether > >>> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to sup= port their > >>> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document = does let > >>> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" wa= y. I > >>> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and = use that > >>> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing= our > >>> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at= it can be > >>> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" parad= igm for a > >>> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be en= tirely > >>> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wron= g - and a > >>> BCP does that... > >>> > >>> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not= alter the > >>> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work wi= thin it." > >>> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: "= Working > >>> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being manage= d on > >>> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has al= ways been > >>> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't= change > >>> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes = more > >>> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place whe= re is is > >>> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. > >>> > >>> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the arg= ument that > >>> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *opin= ion* the > >>> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHu= b" applies > >>> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels very= close to > >>> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with = a Bic pen > >>> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one examp= le: > >>> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of g= itea, > >>> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives on= e tool > >>> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. > >>> > >>> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when peop= le happen > >>> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue= tracker > >>> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal con= venience > >>> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions g= et made in > >>> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this wi= ll end up > >>> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker= , and > >>> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions= made. > >>> > >>> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decid= es to > >>> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or impl= icitly) > >>> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. > >>> > >>> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one w= hen a > >>> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues b= etween > >>> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can'= t transfer > >>> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they = have to be > >>> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state = (I may > >>> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that ta= lks about > >>> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version= , and what > >>> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at > >>> www.github.com/wkumari/ to > >>> www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administrat= ive > >>> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could= see. I > >>> think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep th= e > >>> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that mo= ving the > >>> repo entails. > >>> > >>> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b= : maintain > >>> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitH= ub - but I > >>> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the = "one true > >>> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > > > > > -- > > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > > idea in the first place. > > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > > of pants. > > ---maf > > > --=20 I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Tue Mar 10 12:50:10 2020 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 171473A0A24; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:49:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 rQPEAcQJvBXB; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) (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 9A3CB3A0A59; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id m15so6764795pgv.12; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:49:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=AgrrUmtaonJPhGBlH5ySI0YEZoTFDf68rBP/tXZp7Ac=; b=vMBYmaetvyG+Ow0Tt8C6VYazzBFo1fsiybJVu6LL0tH68RUNQj0nJzcIujJ2iRgpLZ cV3QU15inPljLkFuzw56UyPv59ZU5Y1QIVc0Al37AyRB6WLfkF/jHmWXEaUEd3V+T8HT Eqj5SJR/HOhnEVSa7IpZF34A//PpoiuSaoDxhJyLuM91m2X8qjwkwGp4LoHHtWRdt4Oe 5np8IJNp+BZ/TbzoK/grWYT2dm3ajhBOx+zXzR9KJmjk+wXAtyph/Cmbo3UM+pzVkRYD 6YWD+CAwfbbc0Y16A8ccxiD/+SgyT9C0KnH3Xb1TO4+2TwDJhoK98iixebZi7EnzpAsT 8dXA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AgrrUmtaonJPhGBlH5ySI0YEZoTFDf68rBP/tXZp7Ac=; b=YZdCsj4ZTUBQfGHjFtmws5nDnXnbAJhaPxtMtpLTbTHYMG8e4Enljf/FTFE/YroJeY 31iipFy9wnfiLPzpCIVMWaYBw+yrg0YfP0nYwZBTxuBrS5CMeLsVsTwhMgX2kih3iR3a j28XqzX3bIJwn4SX6sk/5P25OT/1C1YsCT4q/dHynpFZEUhXTDtLoAr1C4rVNM8F0nbM kqK6HgVSXz2H+Z+R5Z5UXggW09R7ogLPnzjssSGo6Pr3xx27/d9bs50APKMihq5DvUtT Ji/CCpp/1Lahbj7Ku/y0FFHZTDXDRkOkpDtr9cQVLA6P69j0TAjCZ9YtGrNmyjBwtAgg H/1w== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1qHB50Vd6sHxpULlVH3sLWmATlytlzF0hD9DzgFi5ieDF1jQbI rClxQlruBbNBG1Kmd8jq5dcU3e1p X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsU1fOzIaDxsLk7KGJ1FQH36qpRJQqoNR0jBTHogndsO9ITupoXmjRHT4Buarwuj+LvcD3/vA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:5a23:: with SMTP id o35mr22865213pgb.60.1583869789324; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:49:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.25.143]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y4sm19786095pfe.31.2020.03.10.12.49.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:49:48 -0700 (PDT) To: Warren Kumari Cc: Alissa Cooper , Eric Rescorla , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , IESG References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 08:49:44 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 19:50:02 -0000 Hmm Warren. This seems to match https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/st= atements/iesg-discuss-criteria/#stand-undisc much better than https://www= =2Eietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/#stand-dis= c Regards Brian Carpenter On 11-Mar-20 07:51, Warren Kumari wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:39 PM Alissa Cooper wrote= : >> >> Isn=E2=80=99t this really an objection to the entire WG and its charte= r, and not to this document specifically? >=20 > Not really, but I will grant you that it is close... >=20 > A document which explained how to manage discussion between working > group mailing lists and GitHub issues and pull requests; how text > contributions are expected to be made; labeling and naming > conventions; maintaining readable draft snapshots; using tooling and > automation; informing participants about IETF policies; and other > information would be useful -- but this does more than that - it > pushes a (fairly) complex solution, and implies that it is the best > practice. All of the above could still happen with documents at > www.github.com/billy-joe-bob, not www.github.com/ietf-important-wg, > with much less faff, and putting chairs in a "special" position. >=20 > W >=20 >> >> Alissa >> >> >>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:= >>> >>> I'm going to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but >>> this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for >>> DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.". >>> >>> W >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Warren, >>>> >>>> I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but= before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies= to this DISCUSS? >>>> >>>> -Ekr >>>> >>>> >>>> [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-crite= ria/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for >>>>> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss >>>>> >>>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to a= ll >>>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this >>>>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteri= a.html >>>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:= >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------= --- >>>>> DISCUSS: >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------= --- >>>>> >>>>> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering= me enough >>>>> that I'm changing it to a discuss. >>>>> >>>>> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, with= out good >>>>> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with = discussion / >>>>> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents in= clude >>>>> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github= at >>>>> https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version = of the >>>>> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. Th= e authors >>>>> gratefully accept pull requests. ]" >>>>> >>>>> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administerin= g, etc a WG >>>>> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I = could find) >>>>> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use GitH= ub (because >>>>> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos.= If WG >>>>> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can = find it, and >>>>> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having = control and >>>>> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------= --- >>>>> COMMENT: >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------= --- >>>>> >>>>> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. >>>>> >>>>> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: >>>>> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way fo= r working >>>>> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says= : "Whether >>>>> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to s= upport their >>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the documen= t does let >>>>> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" = way. I >>>>> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), an= d use that >>>>> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposi= ng our >>>>> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long = at it can be >>>>> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" par= adigm for a >>>>> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be = entirely >>>>> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wr= ong - and a >>>>> BCP does that... >>>>> >>>>> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will n= ot alter the >>>>> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work = within it." >>>>> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g:= "Working >>>>> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being mana= ged on >>>>> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has = always been >>>>> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn= 't change >>>>> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / make= s more >>>>> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place w= here is is >>>>> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9= =2E >>>>> >>>>> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the a= rgument that >>>>> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *op= inion* the >>>>> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "Git= Hub" applies >>>>> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels ve= ry close to >>>>> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets wit= h a Bic pen >>>>> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one exa= mple: >>>>> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of= gitea, >>>>> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives = one tool >>>>> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. >>>>> >>>>> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when pe= ople happen >>>>> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the iss= ue tracker >>>>> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal c= onvenience >>>>> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions= get made in >>>>> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this = will end up >>>>> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue track= er, and >>>>> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisio= ns made. >>>>> >>>>> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG dec= ides to >>>>> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or im= plicitly) >>>>> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. >>>>> >>>>> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one= when a >>>>> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues= between >>>>> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You ca= n't transfer >>>>> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and the= y have to be >>>>> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of stat= e (I may >>>>> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that = talks about >>>>> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted versi= on, and what >>>>> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at >>>>> www.github.com/wkumari/ to >>>>> www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administr= ative >>>>> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I cou= ld see. I >>>>> think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep = the >>>>> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that = moving the >>>>> repo entails. >>>>> >>>>> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance,= b: maintain >>>>> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in Gi= tHub - but I >>>>> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is th= e "one true >>>>> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list >>>>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad >>> idea in the first place. >>> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressin= g >>> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair >>> of pants. >>> ---maf >>> >> >=20 >=20 From nobody Tue Mar 10 13:38:33 2020 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 D3FF43A0C95; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:38:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.648 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dh1Ngb6v0--W; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:38:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-f48.google.com (mail-io1-f48.google.com [209.85.166.48]) (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 BAAFE3A0CF5; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:38:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f48.google.com with SMTP id m25so14181356ioo.8; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:38:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=B+opPD44AH3CUNqol8YR3GiLf8w3Q/AelVDcgj+oNT4=; b=plXB3S2CogIdyd0RlLeqALSqxe3lpz34rY2OdVsy53ZuMe0v/ghiDkl2DotNk0Rxuh Os30Djxvn7w6Lr5RVAtPUodfBdurhHlXtHN3btdf0yKwtQHDjSfZzlIYg5JbJrGuSJ/i j6lXY8GdfAJebcAhyuzdZQgcjLVcQCGrC61kbZdbEosFexIRaj0DMcGSIMR9zvNKAjSs VND+rcDeJEqPfZWXDZGQIaJ3iG7bgviM61wazaNN6e+KyVBq3YL2mhOafNgEYELIDGLw Mj/BF7JDJLlK9Tt472PwvKxhFzhztu6LMxYx0G+YwfyvhVvqwHoKxPEfUit+kI6xypa+ SVZg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1GxRPSTUBtCmlo4BGEk/jHUHzb+g/GRHlRI4yDJ5Lm2HM4yCMw ItYDwh8ct4i8+WIyzKgb/2wytlruDQMR83Ig9CI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtYCM9bDaC6JYg4qnvudNc7wL1aLSfEd1dRuzYRZPIAy0R4BENJ+lnRiOilRyfayF4+NoxpnGkZhnC6nCcOsvg= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:8952:: with SMTP id b18mr19458235iot.40.1583872689745; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:38:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Barry Leiba Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:37:58 -0400 Message-ID: To: Warren Kumari Cc: Alissa Cooper , Eric Rescorla , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , IESG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 10 Mar 2020 20:38:21 -0000 In the spirit of what Warren says below (and an offlist conversation I've had with him), may I suggest that -- for the moment, at least -- we avoid out-of-hand rejection of his DISCUSS as inadmissible, and instead have at least some of the discussion, with the goal of finding whether there's something we can say more or differently in the document that would allay his concerns? Warren can always go back to "abstain" after that discussion... or even "no objection" if the discussion bears fruit. Barry On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:52 PM Warren Kumari wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:39 PM Alissa Cooper wrote: > > > > Isn=E2=80=99t this really an objection to the entire WG and its charter= , and not to this document specifically? > > Not really, but I will grant you that it is close... > > A document which explained how to manage discussion between working > group mailing lists and GitHub issues and pull requests; how text > contributions are expected to be made; labeling and naming > conventions; maintaining readable draft snapshots; using tooling and > automation; informing participants about IETF policies; and other > information would be useful -- but this does more than that - it > pushes a (fairly) complex solution, and implies that it is the best > practice. All of the above could still happen with documents at > www.github.com/billy-joe-bob, not www.github.com/ietf-important-wg, > with much less faff, and putting chairs in a "special" position. > > W > > > > > Alissa > > > > > > > On Mar 10, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: > > > > > > I'm going to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but > > > this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for > > > DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.". > > > > > > W > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi Warren, > > >> > > >> I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, but= before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies t= o this DISCUSS? > > >> > > >> -Ekr > > >> > > >> > > >> [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-crite= ria/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > > >>> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss > > >>> > > >>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to a= ll > > >>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this > > >>> introductory paragraph, however.) > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteri= a.html > > >>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > >>> DISCUSS: > > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > >>> > > >>> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) bothering= me enough > > >>> that I'm changing it to a discuss. > > >>> > > >>> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, with= out good > > >>> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with = discussion / > > >>> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents in= clude > > >>> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Github= at > > >>> https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version = of the > > >>> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. Th= e authors > > >>> gratefully accept pull requests. ]" > > >>> > > >>> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administerin= g, etc a WG > > >>> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I = could find) > > >>> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use GitH= ub (because > > >>> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos.= If WG > > >>> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can = find it, and > > >>> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having = control and > > >>> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > >>> COMMENT: > > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > >>> > > >>> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. > > >>> > > >>> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: > > >>> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way fo= r working > > >>> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says= : "Whether > > >>> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to s= upport their > > >>> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the documen= t does let > > >>> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" = way. I > > >>> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), an= d use that > > >>> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposi= ng our > > >>> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long = at it can be > > >>> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" par= adigm for a > > >>> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be = entirely > > >>> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wr= ong - and a > > >>> BCP does that... > > >>> > > >>> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will n= ot alter the > > >>> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work = within it." > > >>> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g:= "Working > > >>> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being mana= ged on > > >>> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has = always been > > >>> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn= 't change > > >>> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / make= s more > > >>> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place w= here is is > > >>> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9= . > > >>> > > >>> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the a= rgument that > > >>> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *op= inion* the > > >>> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "Git= Hub" applies > > >>> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels ve= ry close to > > >>> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets wit= h a Bic pen > > >>> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one exa= mple: > > >>> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of= gitea, > > >>> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives = one tool > > >>> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. > > >>> > > >>> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when pe= ople happen > > >>> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the iss= ue tracker > > >>> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal c= onvenience > > >>> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions= get made in > > >>> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this = will end up > > >>> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue track= er, and > > >>> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisio= ns made. > > >>> > > >>> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG dec= ides to > > >>> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or im= plicitly) > > >>> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. > > >>> > > >>> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one= when a > > >>> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues= between > > >>> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You ca= n't transfer > > >>> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and the= y have to be > > >>> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of stat= e (I may > > >>> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that = talks about > > >>> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted versi= on, and what > > >>> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at > > >>> www.github.com/wkumari/ to > > >>> www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administr= ative > > >>> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I cou= ld see. I > > >>> think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep = the > > >>> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that = moving the > > >>> repo entails. > > >>> > > >>> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance,= b: maintain > > >>> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in Gi= tHub - but I > > >>> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is th= e "one true > > >>> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list > > >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > > > idea in the first place. > > > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressin= g > > > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > > > of pants. > > > ---maf > > > > > > > > -- > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > idea in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > of pants. > ---maf > From nobody Tue Mar 10 21:53:11 2020 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 403033A11AF; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:52:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=NuZaHqYJ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=lhJmtmtQ 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 1tmkiyAsGMxj; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B8693A11D2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC97A21EF0; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:52:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:52:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=nN9L6aZICHdb8OdheZTpMP4b4LBD TiKrbACp7FqiyeU=; b=NuZaHqYJfgr1mbha6qW4iY5JzZjCsJtQ1Xmfc6bMXJfc mPlCgg5DmoUB299lub6CYNlUBXQLfeLu1uvg9xq3F5gd4BuX86fvgvYW4S0XcRfM 7wu1OZY7tgSPGClFKkNlI8W1U4Iquh+eojBmhSC/YAezM5fbVRDy0cbT7DGdbAk8 DbdOVJbdt0miBBhZxZuCuQepPMUcQsux6UwrxpyOfpqTCXuret86/bnzGsow1OFg QEjIgrgucp5UWPDSLIjz3u3pcmJX8tJCdxayjDjM9ZwJkOwMNKEkwcQW3IX2qlyL dvUrhMxkGsbKtgV2gX0EgpocOLEuz5qLGoxEnMOiqA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=nN9L6a ZICHdb8OdheZTpMP4b4LBDTiKrbACp7FqiyeU=; b=lhJmtmtQ5QYC/R9WnRA3iI WvyBZ3YX0cECZWoCF4TUJW74Uszh4spsNJPg+WAuD3g6LGHB4CsIM8/38T0Un9nw SSg2TAHZ1d03PcaipQ4qheRH+kikeMu5fbtgzBUDwu6XvO8gFjaiD9P9Q3Pof4NF aTdwg7aCATogI8sRd4DjaJDp5orRsZskCkWWv96kcqdQs8DHkdPi6AFlSj9vDjbm 5BNzeOVV9GaMn9eyn4N2sGJvXBS11Mik1Zvs7KDUE2enXUE8nMuM2E+/JTd16EDp +90mlWE6C+nx/MbdKS6d5JeqvjiEcXmo4BeH46i0ttNUZfxhWfNtPl7ewX/OJKgA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvuddgjeeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgr mhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6F180E00B0; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:52:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <568db74c-4c3e-4bc0-a110-10f7ebd8363a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:52:33 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Warren Kumari" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Warren_Kumari=27s_Discuss_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 04:53:04 -0000 I will try to address Warren's questions here. Apologies for the length; I promise this is not an amplification attack, I just have limited time to process this. On the ideological questions, I have no answer. I value pragmatism too highly. (Separately, someone also pointed out that GitHub doesn't do DNSSEC, but neither does tools.ietf.org, so maybe that's not a principle we can stand our ground on :) On Wed, Mar 11, 2020, at 04:45, Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote: > This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having control and > process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. I get that this goes a long way into examining the details of the process, likely far more so than our previous documents. But I hope that the document is clear how that should be consensual: a WG for which the detailed process is not suitable can operate as before. Indeed, in working groups that follow the more involved processes described here there are a few participants who pay none of the GitHub stuff any mind and that doesn't disadvantage them at all. It's document editors and chairs who sometimes need to manage any impedance mismatch in that case. Frankly there are places where I personally have felt the creep as a negative thing. Part of that is a consequence of finer-grained visibility into what is going on and part of that is in feeling out the process. I don't always agree with the QUIC chairs about the direction they take on minor issues. But I don't see that sort of tension as a product of *this* process, but just a natural tension between participants and chairs. > 1a: [On the implication that GitHub is better] I see what you mean here, but I don't see how to address that. If your concern is about the publication of this document being used to bludgeon people into accepting these work practices against their will, I don't know how to further hedge against that (if you have specific suggestions, I'm happy to take those to the working group). If your concern is that this doesn't fully acknowledge some costs that might be incurred by adopting this path, sure. > 1b: [On dicing with updates to BCP 9] I understand the reaction, but I don't agree with the implication regarding BCP 9. You cited a case that I believe to be benign, in the sense that I believe it to be a restatement. Would it help to avoid 2119 language in that case? Do you believe that there are other such cases? > 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable The reasons for this have been litigated at length and a short synopsis of the conclusions are captured in the draft. Discomfort is an expected side effect of the consensus process; see your doctor if symptoms persist. > 3: > -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions get made in > the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list Given how much of the document is dedicated to addressing this risk, I don't know that anything more can be said here. It is also true that hallway conversations, private chats and email threads, and conference calls are used to reach conclusions. That is how we make progress on the most difficult issues often. It might be oft-lamented, but it is effective. Today, we rely on people catching the worst of that behaviour by reviewing documents, especially at WGLC or IETF LC. None of that changes. I'd argue that this approach improves the situation by giving a public venue to those side discussions, both by allowing others to jump in and by recording a transcript of events. Finally, some of this has to be cultural. We teach others to respect those not present by asking to take discussions to the mailing list in those cases that might benefit from wider discussion and by proactively doing so ourselves when we recognize the need. > 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides to > fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or implicitly) > disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. I should let those people who don't use GitHub speak here about the disenfranchisement point. I agree with the learning curve thing. git is truly abominable, but it's easier than learning a new language and it has fairly broad applicability in the industry. > 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one when a > document is adopted is non-trivial That's interesting. Yes, moving is not free, but I have never had serious problems. I did have a chair decide that a fork was a good plan and that took some unraveling, though the deletion of the repo was probably the biggest problem. On the other hand, moving has always worked for me, I usually only have to fix a couple of broken links to the old repo (for which I usually am able to use the same script I use to setup the repo in the first place). > I think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the > documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that moving the > repo entails. For models that have a lighter touch, that might be OK. There are some issues around ensuring that chairs control who edits documents and so forth though. > Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: maintain > a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub - but I > really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the "one true > way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). This last view (in parentheses) was expressed during early working group sessions and the view of the group was that a single org would be too unwieldy. Even organizations who adopted that model early on, like the W3C, have moved more to independent GitHub orgs. Thanks for your input. From nobody Tue Mar 10 23:18:53 2020 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 969223A12D6; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:18:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=Bq5+9hjc; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=3sb0P0uc 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 IqT3v84mHf2b; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:18:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B3D63A08EC; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:18:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292CF5AB; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 02:18:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 02:18:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=91 0KrJuWvGVnomQlsztcAAvPygcx6JLjwoSoE6KQcIA=; b=Bq5+9hjc/Vg7rMYaAh 6V3KbdLbmE4tlc8cC+wZ2l9TCr15vtCyxicp+5GG3ZOfkrbhImVvMSXhD0TY90at ca0TVG2BrhsF43QmfNWdSZRK3td6ZlL2DY2gcFBdjTGfXj6WVbEJDm6yNFHvjHsb SLbs1wfSrLBReimdWxnybL2GpDXPMaMJ9EjtSBAj1yvphd2JhWmzNkArwfsmQNdV xqV+o/ZikytrHhEpi90IJKUfwtJ7KUa3b1iOb19hNVRyGeEInwOInzwGX1v9Pkhq DcO1V3cmKCUDCnM4/xjUQB6rh7kVw39rIQ7uz7nmbjcitJ07ntH2KIJhk56Fr4Tg 0bIQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=910KrJuWvGVnomQlsztcAAvPygcx6JLjwoSoE6KQc IA=; b=3sb0P0uc+5n5uF+prhburARbqT0qmLWVJ+FsHUisK9c32ObkNtIO6slqO sXcOVTyqbjeLL5pUWJ/HPqT2+S5xarVGXU+9Nz3mKiDsoLPXV4tZzEmvthf/LNqv 4bi21QQ4dclZ4/JfGM2GmcXRrPa9XLActD9f4xmcQDlxd4kEL/LaGQ9pOCuA8nfW 5g6uiQ/xr+RlPnRe3OAq7o9KdYphkcgkG5qYyPFMOQ8TMHPiYlwODX+crGPw+rpt eCXGsYfnYpXJrzgs5gwyjsH97yM9e7E3eOKAOjh4+G0/xBYb6aFXADmN9Hv22OZg jdAsZLX5eT1fM4dMPvR2tRzGXgyKw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvuddgleehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhivghtfhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghr ufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhoph ihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7A60EE00B0; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 02:18:29 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <03a88995-a64b-4214-a408-1e826f3ecc9a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:18:09 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "The IESG" , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 06:18:44 -0000 Hi Rob, Thanks for reviewing this and your thoughts here. I've built you a PR here: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pul= l/44 Some of your comments are already addressed by other PRs though: https:/= /github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pulls On Wed, Mar 11, 2020, at 03:23, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > I think that (a) can be mitigated by adding extra organization owners,= =20 > beyond just the responsible AD. E.g., the github-config suggests also=20= > adding the Secretariat. We should be consistent here, and I think that= =20 > we should decide whether having just the AD and Secretariat is=20 > sufficient. Would it also make sense to mandate the 2FA must be used b= y=20 > all members? If so, then this can be enforced in the organization=20 > settings. The first part of this probably applies to the -config draft mostly. My= understanding is that it isn't more definitive in order to allow chairs= some flexibility in how they operate. I personally think that having a= backup is sensible. At the same time, having a single account with acc= ess to many repositories is a bit scary. The 2FA thing is good advice, but I would again leave that to individual= groups. But not because it isn't good advice, more because the state o= f the art for login is likely to change. WebAuthn is even better than 2= FA, but that is used even less today. In 2 years maybe that won't be tr= ue. In the group I chair (I can't see 2FA status for groups I don't administ= er), 4/8 contributors have 2FA, which would seem to make a mandate diffi= cult to require. That said, if we are even remotely worried about phish= ing, a recommendation is good. > - Perhaps having a gitignore file that filters out standard ssh key na= mes? That might be too much detail for an RFC. See also https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nottingham-how-did-that-= get-into-the-repo/ (I'll take a PR on my tools if you have something concrete, but I don't = know how to target SSH keys with a .gitignore; I guess I could just add = id_ed25519 and id_rsa, but that isn't enough, surely. Or maybe that is = enough...) > The third point I know least about. I understand that the plan is that= =20 > IETF will backup the repos + issues + wikipages? Hopefully the=20 > issues/wikipages are backed up in a format that a script could be=20 > written to update into future tools if required. This is work in progress. Robert Sparks has a draft statement of work a= nd I expect that to go out to bid soon. > 1. It was slightly unclear to me exactly what the full lifecycle of=20= > managing documents in github is meant to be. E.g. is it only for draft= s=20 > up to the point that they are published as RFCs, or is there an=20 > expectation that repositories could exist for longer than that, e.g.=20= > for tracking issues, future revisions, or errata. I think that there=20= > are some source of truth considerations here that perhaps need to be=20= > carefully documented in the repo readme. E.g. folks reading the doc on= =20 > github are not getting the formal RFC, no notification about errata,=20= > etc. This is focused on the production process. I don't think that we do a g= reat job of closing the loop. Some work with the RPC was done, but no o= ne left that process very happy and it hasn't been taken up again. >From my perspective, I see this as iterative. We need to have better pr= ocesses for dealing with maintenance of work that goes for publication, = but a number of factors tend to interfere. Part of that is our insisten= ce on an archival format, part of it is the length of time that publicat= ion takes, part of that is that we just don't have this built into the c= ulture always. Maybe the new IESG can continue to work on this problem. I know that th= e current and previous IESGs have tried a number of approaches. > - Presumably another reason why github was chosen wasn't just because=20= > of large/active contributors, but also because various IETF WGs are=20= > actively making use of github for managing documents =E2=80=93 I know = that we=20 > are. Yes. I consider those people already within the IETF to be a large part= of that community. > =E2=80=9CThis document only aims to address use of GitHub in developi= ng > Documents=E2=80=9D >=20 > - As above regarding the comment on document lifecycle, is that just=20= > through to RFC editor, or beyond? As it says, this is "developing documents". More to be done, I guess. > - Nice, but this doesn't appear to quite follow the normal RFC8174=20 > boilerplate. ;-) Fixed in my copy at Barry's prompting. > Each organization requires owners. The owner team for a Working > Group repository MUST include responsible Area Directors.=20 >=20 > - Should this also include IETF Secretariat (i.e. for consistency with= =20 > the github configuration draft)? Yes. I've added them at a "SHOULD" level. I think that's consistent wi= th the other draft (which avoids icky 2119 words). > - Should IETF github repositories not also have a LICENSE file? E.g. i= n=20 > alignment with the Note-well? Yes. My tools provide a default one that says "See the guidelines for c= ontributions." https://github.com/martinthomson/i-d-template/blob/master/template/LICEN= SE.md As this document relates to contributions, and the -configuration draft = already mentions the LICENSE file, I think we're covered adequately with= out getting into that. > Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for > anything more than managing drafts. >=20 > - Is it clear what "draft" means here? Would =E2=80=9CInternet-Draft=E2= =80=9D be=20 > better? It might be worth checking other usage of draft in the documen= t. Please see https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 which incl= udes text that I think greatly improves this. > - I suggest =E2=80=9Cshould=E2=80=9D rather than SHOULD for both of th= ese. I agree. None of this needs normative force. > =E2=80=9CA document editor can still use GitHub independently for doc= uments [...] >=20 > - I agree with the sentiment here, but I think that there perhaps=20 > should be some more rules: >=20 > - Is the assumption that this repository is not under ietf-wg-?= No. Though that is a discussion to have between chairs and editors. So= me groups are comfortable with individual submissions living in the WG o= rg, others are concerned about what that might imply. > - If not, perhaps this document should recommended a statement that=20= > the repository is for use by the authors and does not necessarily=20 > reflect the procedures defined in draft-ietf-git-using-github, and tha= t=20 > the WG work formally happens on the WG email alias. I don't think we can reasonably expect to levy requirements on work that= happens essentially outside of these processes, except to the extent th= at we insist on the notice. Even that is stretching it a little to my m= ind. > - If these are public repositories then I would thought that everyone= =20 > has read access anyway, and can have issues assigned to them, etc. You need to be part of the organization before you can be assigned work.= I think that avoids GitHub from dealing with a specific class of spam.= > Revisions used to generate documents that are submitted as Internet- > Drafts SHOULD be tagged in repositories to provide a record of > submissions.=20 >=20 > - Perhaps suggest the format of the tag. I.e. the tag should just be=20= > the name/version of the draft being published. [Ideally, longer term w= e=20 > would have tooling to help with this.] We do indeed have tooling and documentation, but I don't want to prescri= be a specific format in a document like this (I was in the rough regardi= ng the org naming convention). Convention would seem to suffice here. See https://github.com/martinthomson/i-d-template/blob/master/doc/SUBMIT= TING.md From nobody Tue Mar 10 23:50:43 2020 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 57D4A3A1342; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:50:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=ijo25rUA; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Hc5wzEHo 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 UrYjpvT5S3P9; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7FF33A1340; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D87A596; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 02:50:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 02:50:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=kn cAXyf1KOA4JM510QHkzdE77AJAdjmvrr7ESJ6k5ck=; b=ijo25rUA9ZqnDFfYY9 WuJ7dto50m1gBNQl6cFtA7ZAZ7czxGsRiHrnbSj7V003viVosaeowxNIVvti1mxb 9edhMUOM9XD+Px2/c74VgjWUFNy7I5Z3WFoA3atnS8J8/Dx5bZEfbmiv5xZ5syfw V3/mn/RExePeCA4Dt21jp37jNiYX4m7zcelyVcbckJVsGMR7sdRFCryDYXRKfKX6 DkLTLU+GUOm4mtaLJj1fAfQVZAA8ArTN2Vy882EPuAgpe9+C1xux/6jnAjriS+uY NhPI2QdZck4cOhs+sp8lhuGKo2j28Q9lA68KIlLPT4iI+YUWJfBOesJZmQEQwXsf GY6w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=kncAXyf1KOA4JM510QHkzdE77AJAdjmvrr7ESJ6k5 ck=; b=Hc5wzEHoiyUo4hvj4S4qS5NvIWmbc9T2ZPcW9evtqmXm5GfCS3J+0qF5D CeGbB6jMbsnXCLBzdUHAFFZIUPRuyc/v/OMAqieUUyqnUxwmdDiu7RMrE+QoFh22 sY2KUUx2eVJWXSTd5dVGpuLpIOIVrgfKgNVXRX+5lYgeNSw7IIf/GAvqy3LNGWTZ Fs9XzDS/L6FtDxY44UKeFR2qMdP+aVobnyErD+PkSlH6wzICRd00HNEDLafebT+4 ITOcf4My00tFvEzzaEkwj1g8Kfk63Psi7uc9t+5ZUhoOV2pciScXEPpM3xOEOt9t zdz8B0r+qYkh+9F+WXeIDpoeCgaKQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvuddguddttdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtgfesthhqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdfo rghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqne cuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecu rfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 97DBDE00B0; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 02:50:36 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <518946b5-c848-43ec-9ef1-99e9c925a20e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <158384439069.15427.16653271470255787018@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158384439069.15427.16653271470255787018@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:50:17 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Mirja Kuehlewind" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objectio?= =?utf-8?q?n_on_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 06:50:41 -0000 Hi Mirja, Thanks for taking the time to read through this. I appreciate the input= . I've made some changes in https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pul= l/45 but we might want to iterate on that some more. On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 23:46, Mirja K=C3=BChlewind via Datatracker wro= te: > I don't really understand the relationship between this document and > draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration.=20 I think that document encompasses most of the stuff that I don't believe= is appropriate for a BCP, so I think that the split is useful. I think= that others have addressed questions about the suitability of that docu= ment for publication. > 1) Sec 3.2 > "...or they might create repositories for individual documents on requ= est." > I made a similar comment in my ballot for > draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration. I think creating repos for ind= ividuals > document is maybe not always the best option. I assume the intention h= ere to > not out-rule any cases where this might be okay (e.g. if a document is= expectd > to be adopted soon), however, I would rather prefer to see a recommend= ation to > usually not do that as there can be many individual drafts in the grou= ps and it > can provide a wrong signal if repos are created for some and not other= s. The intention is to not be specific. What I have heard, from multiple W= orking Group chairs, is that they have allowed people to create repos fo= r individual contributions in the organization and that they - and their= contributors - have found it to be valuable. Chairs who do this seem t= o be quite open about allowing anyone to request a repo. That seems lik= e a healthy balance. I think that is good, because it removes any implied status involved in = having a draft repo in the org. I personally have fewer issues with mov= ing repos than Warren does, so maybe I don't mind keeping things private= until they are adopted. Other do report challenges though. > 2) Sec 4.1.3: > " Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group > consensus MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented.= " > I do understand the intention here as it is important to make process,= however, > inline with the rest of the document and the general idea that practis= es can > vary from group to group, I think this really should be a SHOULD NOT o= nly. This has been iterated on since after Barry's review. Do the changes in= https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 work here? > 3) Sec 4.2: > " Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rath= er > than committing directly to the "master" branch of the repository."= > I think this does not align well with how we work today (without GitHu= b). E.g. > if a group decides to use GitHub to better track changes and maybe eas= ily > integrate editorial comments, but decide to have all discussion on the= mailing > list (and not use github issues), I think it would be fully okay for t= he > editors just commit directly based on the consensus on the mailing lis= t. So I > think the important part is that substantial comments should only be c= ommitted > with wg consensus and therefore it is a good practice to have pull req= uests > first to declare consensus based on the concrete proposed edits. Howev= er, if a > different way to declare consensus is used that's fine as well. In sho= rt, I > think the SHOULD is to string here for the general case. I think that it greatly improves transparency, and I want to add that WG= policies could insist upon this practice, but we don't need normative f= orce in the two statements in this paragraph. > 4) Sec 5.3 (mostly editorial): [...] > This text seems to apply more general to all content in section 5 and = should > maybe be moved out of section 5.3. Similarly I'm not sure if section 5= .3.1 and > 5.3.2 should actually be subsection of 5.3. The question of which issu= e to > track seem rather orthogonal to the question who resolves the issue (I= agree > that this discussion does not make sense when no issue are tracked lik= e in sec > 5.1 but it could make sense for the mode in section 5.2) The organization here is tricky, but I do agree that this text is generi= c. I've moved the piece you quoted up to the intro to Section 5. > 5) Sec 5.3.1: > "The risk is that > design changes might not always reflect the consensus of the Workin= g > Group." > I know that happens, even without GitHub, but should ideally not be th= e case. > However, I think the root cause is rather that changes were incorrectl= y not > identified by the editors as requiring consensus. Maybe this can be re= worded > accordingly to not give the impression that it is okay to implement de= sign > changes in a working group without consensus. Actually this is a broad= er > problem (independent of GitHub) because some editors, especially when = they also > have been the authors of the individual draft, often implement design = changes > first in a new version and then ask the working group for consensus. A= s I said > that's a different issue but it could be good to mention that GitHub a= nd the > use of PRs can actually help to not use this practice but always each = consensus > first. I've added a piece about identifying the need for consensus, that is a g= ood addition, but I don't see anything else actionable here. I read the= text as saying pretty much what you want it to. > 6) Sec 5.3.1: > "... it is likely appropriate to move > to a more tightly controlled process." > Maybe add something like "e.g. potentially during or after after worki= ng group > last call". I don't want to prompt a particular outcome by making that sort of sugge= stion. I appreciate that QUIC is weird, but it isn't THAT weird. I've = had several similar experiences in a relatively short period of time wit= h HTTP/2, TLS, ACME, and a few others. > 7) Sec 5.3.2: > " Chairs might choose to manage the process of deciding which issues= > are substantive. For instance, chairs might reserve the ability to= > use the "design" label to new issues (see Section 5.4.1) and to clo= se > issues marked as "design". Chairs should always allow document > editors to identify and address editorial issues as they see fit." > I guess you could also use normative language here: "MAY choose to" an= d "Chairs > SHOULD always allow" I don't like normative clauses in a for example, but the latter seems go= od. > 8) Sec 5.3.2: > " As documents mature further, explicit confirmation of technical > decisions with the Working Group mailing list becomes more importan= t." > Not sure I agree here. I know what you mean but explicit confirmation = on the > mailing list is always important. Maybe there is a way to rephrase tha= t (or > just remove that sentence...?) This is really only emphasis, but I would prefer to keep it. > 9) Sec 5.3.2: > " Gaining Working Group consensus about the resolution of issues can= be > done in the abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the > outcome of discussions as they see fit." > I'm actually not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify? You can get consensus on specific language (usually in the form of a PR = in this setting) or you can gain consensus on the outline of a design, w= ithout text. In the past, we've been quite effective at the latter as w= ell as the former. Specific text is more concrete, but it can be better= (particularly for documents in early stages) to just work out a rough o= utline first. > 10) Sec 5.3.2: > " WGLC SHOULD be proposed as pull requests, and MUST be discussed on= > the mailing list, and MUST have chairs explicitly confirm consensus= ." > I agree with the "MUST be discussed on the mailing list" (as this is i= nline > with RFC2418 e.g. 3.2 but therefore doesn't necessarily need to be nor= mative in > this doc) but find the other two SHOULD and MUST too strict. I don't t= hink this > is aligned with the process we have today in groups and we should not = use this > document to make the process more strict than it is. Especially I'm no= t sure > what "chairs MUST explicitly confirm consensus" really means and it se= ems to be > a requirement independent of GitHub and therefore eventually would eve= n update > RFC2481. How about: Ideally, substantive changes to documents that have passed WGLC are proposed as pull requests, and MUST be discussed on the mailing list. Ha= ving chairs explicitly confirm consensus on changes ensures that previous con= sensus decisions are not overturned without cause. > 11) Sec 5.4.4: > It might be too late for this kind of input, however, as I review the = document > I'll note it here anyway. In taps we also have a "discuss" label to ma= rk issue > that has been discussed but need further discussion e.g. at an (interi= m) > meeting. For this, one could even create a milestone to indicate at wh= ich > meeting more discussion should take place (or when e.g. a document is > text-ready until when text should be provided). We/the editors also di= d this > for a while in taps. We used labels like this in QUIC too. Then we found that project boards= were better for this. I think that someone suggested this during WGLC a= nd we decided not to include it. > 12) Section 6 seems to encourage revision only in preparation for meet= ings. I'm > not sure if that is inline with our usual working practice. I mean yes= in > reality we see the draft submission deadline as forcing function for u= pdates > and there want to keep it but we also do encourage to rev documents mo= re often > and work continuously, e.g. when a mayor change was implemented or a m= ayor > issue resolved. And yes this works probably better for smaller documen= ts but > the section seems a bit contradicting to this practice. I mean the rea= son that > we see many updates just at the draft deadline is because editors assi= gn time > to make updates to resolve issue to match the deadline. If editors mak= e > continuous changes we should encourage to update more often. Maybe it = could > rather say something like: "Revisions SHOULD be submitted as I-Ds when= a > signification issue has been resolved. Editors MAY bundle multiple cha= nges in > one revision if updates are done in timely close coherence and SHOULD = update at > least two weeks before any meeting." However, some of this advise is a= ctually > not GitHub specific and might again just touch our general guidelines = and as > such update RFC2026 and RFC2418... The intent here is to reiterate 2418 regarding session documents and to = encourage routine publication of snapshots. > 13) sec 7: > " Chairs MUST consider input from all discussion venues when assessi= ng > consensus including GitHub, mailing lists, interim meetings, and IE= TF > meetings." > This seems like an update to RFC2481 again... as maybe also some other= notes in > this section. If you have concrete alternatives, I'm open to tweaking. I think that a= s a restatement of existing principles, this is fine as is, but I'm sure= that a different and better formulation is possible. From nobody Wed Mar 11 05:16:15 2020 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 E2E913A1803; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:16:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 yGlIO9iIGXtT; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-il1-x142.google.com (mail-il1-x142.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::142]) (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 678BF3A1801; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x142.google.com with SMTP id f5so1756982ilq.5; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:16:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ob3ifkhRUNhQX2qlTVBeAtyuQbrV6zqR11ZbILp5LYY=; b=CG8z+S2fnScIkBey85Xthbz5xJJXZUlr9cGkKb2zkjBEcJU8p3Hi+q/gwRl8TOMPUt hhGFvO7dg+Xyby7rzpcV7+0TaY4gaTVlZWdouc50sWXF9QuJq7PrsJetST39FTaxJMpk XMlMFH3B3kYQHFhm3L2ndDv6G7fX6BQTXxlfv9MVQ6LvxX+QqK6bT48hrwMLjOwnv1Lv 8OxWzZT5QlNX0jDB0G7DhWswTy3Z70IPdwqFy7voRZe3wAYn2toxmh4fFg/wJzxZTxzF GTM6W0bhg1c8+WB9t+KC6lbdStXjlNT9RbWH4wi2thWu7NnvsyAZWbrTbLXnY0o/HYTJ awew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ob3ifkhRUNhQX2qlTVBeAtyuQbrV6zqR11ZbILp5LYY=; b=EfrLCtWKx+FkG+ncqEGVtTi+u5tETF7nVDuNMAn9U6vj2rlays2f61MbmHGJZa1ZF3 yjABS7pKvUsYWCpVUnrtbn8HZzs6/9nPBC2QzV99+aHCZ95AksVPAAnKo2/4WxYO4ZFw goZb4JDNAFjRkNAJbA7wqnLHJ8F68iuyjdFHOFC0ohudnRXvBZanP1O77DNbXIkwKVkU wF68W6FKOlifi8S/sKpWEkbZ/wLGdW8Yi4/vDOwdyWeYRNYKNrExNkTxZOMS4/wiHzfb i/V/7p9YWOL0kDcP2JWtVtRQCO2W3GLYIbFtcQPbMVXiYWqqWZDkvX+1aItchy3+4nOL GO2A== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ32TULFIxarYp+ECzbGJi/j1GHFw9p9Gkoc47l3TXCNKy5wh5Bz kZGFvb74WAgTb5f67tAf7xabxpaUC8UKz4/v1fY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuIR4kX2ztlv1UzHvgHiNPGA+ms8HEdcyGtOOXdlMY+GljqN1d9Z9R5VGkAt6iWIZ+Rfs60lcxLwzEcrbK+pz8= X-Received: by 2002:a92:280a:: with SMTP id l10mr2889836ilf.49.1583928970507; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:16:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158383812185.15459.5142442277630341183@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <158383812185.15459.5142442277630341183@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Rob Sayre Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 22:15:59 +1000 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?w4lyaWMgVnluY2tl?= Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a2fb5105a0933303" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_Abstain_on_draf?= =?utf-8?q?t-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 12:16:13 -0000 --000000000000a2fb5105a0933303 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 9:02 PM =C3=89ric Vyncke via Datatracker < noreply@ietf.org> wrote: > > Is there a reason why "GitHub" is used rather than simply "Git" or simila= r > system ? At least, it is explicit to be the commercial web site " > github.com". > Alternatives such as GitLab and BitBucket are only briefly mentioned. > The document is not about "Git" because the interesting parts are the web services built around that version control system (issues, PRs, interactive diffs, etc). There are competing services, but it would be difficult to talk about them as a group without requiring them to be undifferentiated. Section 1.3 has an amazing-to-my-eyes sentences "This document concentrates > primarily on GitHub as it has a large and active community of > contributors. As > a result, some content might not be applicable to other similar > services.". In > my opinion, if the same reasoning was applied to other topics, the Intern= et > will become centralized into popular applications without innovation. > IETF tools for producing documents are pretty specialized. I don't think they've ever escaped on to the general Internet, except in cases where other SDOs copy them. thanks, Rob --000000000000a2fb5105a0933303 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 9:02 PM =C3= =89ric Vyncke via Datatracker <norep= ly@ietf.org> wrote:

Is there a reason why "GitHub" is used rather than simply "G= it" or similar
system ? At least, it is explicit to be the commercial web site "github.com".
Alternatives such as GitLab and BitBucket are only briefly mentioned.

The document is not about "Git" be= cause the interesting parts are the web services built around that version = control system (issues, PRs, interactive diffs, etc). There are competing s= ervices, but it would be difficult to talk about them as a group without re= quiring them to be undifferentiated.
=C2=A0

<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-l= eft:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> Section 1.3 has an amazing-to-my-eyes sentences "This document concent= rates
primarily on GitHub as it has a large and active community of contributors.= =C2=A0 As
a result, some content might not be applicable to other similar services.&q= uot;. In
my opinion, if the same reasoning was applied to other topics, the Internet=
will become centralized into popular applications without innovation.

IETF tools for producing documents are prett= y specialized. I don't think they've ever escaped on to the general= Internet, except in cases where other SDOs copy them.

=
thanks,
Rob

--000000000000a2fb5105a0933303-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 06:18:08 2020 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 93ADF3A18C3 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:18:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bj2f1zoTi8KV for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:18:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 1E2B93A18C1 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02BDI3B9001173; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:18:03 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 5A2DE202791; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:18:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C1E0205501; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:18:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02BDI3V5003161; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:18:03 +0100 To: Henrik Levkowetz Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> <6774efc6-0071-5f8b-8007-8c6ab124c754@gmx.de> <73e036e7-7ce5-4bd5-1b42-f208c2eadc5b@levkowetz.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <101936c1-665b-dcd2-1fbd-8e8b60a02883@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:18:03 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <73e036e7-7ce5-4bd5-1b42-f208c2eadc5b@levkowetz.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 13:18:07 -0000 Hi Henrik, Thanks for the reply. Le 10/03/2020 à 18:30, Henrik Levkowetz a écrit : > Hi Alexandre, > > On 2020-03-10 17:32, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> I have tried to write people's names in the Ack section. "ä" became >> "ae". Japanese characters got un-understandable - scrambled in a >> strange way. >> >> Then, from private feedback, I tried to put in the Ack section. >> >> The xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org complains this: >> Error: Unable to validate the XML document: INPUT >> : Line 1439: Element contact is not declared in t list of >> possible children >> : Line 1440: No declaration for element contact >> : Line 1440: No declaration for attribute fullname of element >> contact > > It looks as if you're running your XML through the v2 parser and formatter. I run https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org. That is v2 as of today. Is there a v3 xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org? > To use the element you need to use the v3 parser and formatter, > either by converting your v2 xml explicitly to v3 with 'xml2rfc --v2v3', > or by having it done on the fly by using the v3 switch 'xml2rfc --v3 ...'. Aha. It seems that is a command line. But here I prefer to use a GUI on the web. Can I achieve conversion of my v2 xml to v3 with a GUI rather than a command on CLI? And then, can I run a v3 xml2rfc on a GUI on the web? Alex > The legacy v2 parser and formatters knows nothing about the new v3 elements. > > > Best regards, > > Henrik > > > From nobody Wed Mar 11 06:26:52 2020 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 886623A1909 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:26:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id prni4USaO0v3 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 95B083A18F2 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02BDQZTu025934; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:26:35 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 0D2EE20552B; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:26:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0AC7205527; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:26:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02BDQYKW009982; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:26:34 +0100 To: Julian Reschke Cc: Henrik Levkowetz , ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158250611906.1067.14505081937854561120@ietfa.amsl.com> <3450f158-be66-71d3-b29a-6751650d64af@gmail.com> <26084a2d-a6f7-955c-7994-3dc48f58f145@gmail.com> <05fd402e-5ee3-4996-8394-8835a8f3f0c7@www.fastmail.com> <1cc09787-e0a2-b504-a177-ecc5f17d1be6@gmx.de> <6774efc6-0071-5f8b-8007-8c6ab124c754@gmx.de> <73e036e7-7ce5-4bd5-1b42-f208c2eadc5b@levkowetz.com> <64a8ca08-0e43-a5b4-9615-86908710d8be@gmx.de> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:26:34 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <64a8ca08-0e43-a5b4-9615-86908710d8be@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 13:26:49 -0000 Le 10/03/2020 à 19:06, Julian Reschke a écrit : > On 10.03.2020 18:30, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: >> Hi Alexandre, >> >> On 2020-03-10 17:32, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >>> I have tried to write people's names in the Ack section. "ä" >>> became "ae". Japanese characters got un-understandable - >>> scrambled in a strange way. >>> >>> Then, from private feedback, I tried to put >> fullname="Ole Trøan (Ole Troan)."/> in the Ack section. >>> >>> The xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org complains this: Error: Unable to >>> validate the XML document: INPUT : Line 1439: Element >>> contact is not declared in t list of possible children : >>> Line 1440: No declaration for element contact : Line >>> 1440: No declaration for attribute fullname of element contact >> >> It looks as if you're running your XML through the v2 parser and >> formatter. >> >> To use the element you need to use the v3 parser and >> formatter, either by converting your v2 xml explicitly to v3 with >> 'xml2rfc --v2v3', or by having it done on the fly by using the v3 >> switch 'xml2rfc --v3 ...'. >> >> The legacy v2 parser and formatters knows nothing about the new v3 >> elements. > > Right. > > Also: > > > > would be an abuse of the element. Should be: > > . > > (That said, the ASCII version IMHO is not needed here anyway) Ah excellent, it is a very appropriate element behaviour. I am patiently waiting to be able to test it. The fact that asciiFullname is optional is good, because not all non-roman native name people have decided precisely what to put in their roman interpretation (ascii), so it is good that is optional. For example, I just discussed with somebody from Greece who prefers 'Gkemou' for her name instead of earlier 'Gemou', even though the French who read if would prefer to see it 'Guemou' (the goal of translating from the native language spelling to roman spelling is that the readers of that roman spelling make it sound like the originally pronounced). Alex > > Best regards, Julian From nobody Wed Mar 11 07:31:48 2020 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 8EE663A0765; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:31:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 pgMcFTaEPZG8; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 4135E3A0764; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122333.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02BEMY8M029070; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:31:32 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=TIXKQlFhbJG0sOAs1SXthlbDiz5fx4Bj0SHx5liEfgY=; b=jD8sB8qOENH6NXBgz9u/wzaBLMFBjYp7ut4P/jzSZpt964z/hj4D6C5KYeOYzmWD30+d MzKIcup3LbDhbC3Kin+M0cQVem+mTsTXRggEVSKxDUZE/yodjdtP0go8IAF76XllAsW1 35rELcCy5Ptbqfr2i8VKvosmmsuRB3kR198+wm2//iP7ECaQ1ePEga62mAFWDLczbjzT 6qmssHxcMRQG9HP3nJ7kP1R5fJ2qtIx5k5koXFkuWq3UMpA8yMeuYaytmN6RjAQO0k1O GUBTkO6wYXjtrrX+H7BOn94nWFIEXKoqNysdvoCgFly5dXE7aN2PcLZWrzFmL+T76Fco dg== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ym3regpvh-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:31:32 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02BEHWLR015491; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:31:30 -0700 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ymafbkdyq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:31:30 -0700 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 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:31:29 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:31:29 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson , Warren Kumari , "The IESG" CC: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , Christopher Wood Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV92EDpe+HBbcqFU+LWQgoCK9pAKhDdFcA Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:31:28 +0000 Message-ID: <80177FCE-9769-4D40-B5D9-38602E7AFE4E@akamai.com> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <568db74c-4c3e-4bc0-a110-10f7ebd8363a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <568db74c-4c3e-4bc0-a110-10f7ebd8363a@www.fastmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.112.82] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-11_05:2020-03-11, 2020-03-11 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002050000 definitions=main-2003110092 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-11_05:2020-03-11, 2020-03-11 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1011 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2003110092 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 14:31:37 -0000 PiAgICBUb2RheSwgd2UgcmVseSBvbiBwZW9wbGUgY2F0Y2hpbmcgdGhlIHdvcnN0IG9mIHRoYXQg YmVoYXZpb3VyIGJ5IHJldmlld2luZyBkb2N1bWVudHMsIGVzcGVjaWFsbHkgYXQgV0dMQyBvciBJ RVRGIExDLiAgTm9uZSBvZiB0aGF0IGNoYW5nZXMuICBJJ2QgYXJndWUgdGhhdCB0aGlzIGFwcHJv YWNoIGltcHJvdmVzIHRoZSBzaXR1YXRpb24gYnkgZ2l2aW5nIGEgcHVibGljIHZlbnVlIHRvIHRo b3NlIHNpZGUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbnMsIGJvdGggYnkgYWxsb3dpbmcgb3RoZXJzIHRvIGp1bXAgaW4g YW5kIGJ5IHJlY29yZGluZyBhIHRyYW5zY3JpcHQgb2YgZXZlbnRzLg0KICANClRoaXMgaXMgYSB2 ZXJ5IGltcG9ydGFudCBwb2ludC4gIFRoZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIHRyYW5zY3JpcHQgaXMgcmVjb3Jk ZWQgaW4gdGhlIGlzc3VlIHRocmVhZCwgdGhleSBhcmUgb2Z0ZW4gcmVsYXllZC9zdW1tYXJpemVk IHRvIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdHMsIGFuZCBvZnRlbiBjb3BpZWQgaW50byBpbmRpdmlkdWFsIGdpdCBy ZXBvc2l0b3JpZXMuICBJIHN0cm9uZ2x5IGJlbGlldmUgdGhhdCB3ZSdyZSBtb3JlIGxpa2VseSB0 byBzZWUgaW5jcmVhc2VkIHRyYW5zcGFyZW5jeS4gKEkgaGF2ZSBvbmUgZGF0YXBvaW50IHRvIGJh Y2sgdGhhdCB1cCwgd2hlbiBPcGVuU1NMIG1vdmVkIGZyb20gcHJpdmF0ZSBzZXJ2ZXJzIHRvIGRv aW5nICJnaXRodWIgZmlyc3QiLCB0aGUgY2hhbmdlIHdhcyBodWdlLiAgWWVzLCBjb2RlIGlzbid0 IEktRCdzLCBidXQgc3RpbGwuLi4pDQoNCiAgICA+IDU6IE1vdmluZyBzdGF0ZSAocHJpbWFyaWx5 IGlzc3VlcykgZnJvbSBhIHBlcnNvbmFsIHJlcG8gdG8gYSBXRyBvbmUgd2hlbiBhDQogICAgPiBk b2N1bWVudCBpcyBhZG9wdGVkIGlzIG5vbi10cml2aWFsDQoNCkl0J3MgYSBzaW1wbGUgbWF0dGVy IG9mIGNvZGluZyBhcyB0aGUgc2F5aW5nIGdvZXMuIDopIFRoZSBBUEkncyBhcmUgdGhlcmUgdG8g bWFrZSBpdCB0cml2aWFsLCBpdCBqdXN0IGhhc24ndCBiZWVuIGRvbmUgeWV0Lg0KDQogICAgPiBi dXQgSQ0KICAgID4gcmVhbGx5IGRvbid0IHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgdGhlIElFVEYgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGlt cGx5aW5nIHRoYXQgdGhpcyBpcyB0aGUgIm9uZSB0cnVlDQogICAgPiB3YXkiIChCQ1ApIChub3Ig ZG8gSSBsaWtlIHRoZSBXRyBob3N0ZWQgbW9kZWwpLg0KICAgIA0KQXJlIHdlIGRvaW5nIHRoYXQ/ ICBJIHRoaW5rIGl0J3MgImlmIHlvdSB3YW50IHRvIGRvIHRoaXMga2luZCBvZiB0aGluZyAodXNl IGdpdGh1YikgaGVyZSdzIHRoZSBiZXN0IHdheSB0byBkbyBpdCBpbiBvdXIgZXhwZXJpZW5jZS4i DQoNCldlIG9mdGVuIHNheSB3ZSdyZSBub3QgdGhlIHByb3RvY29sIHBvbGljZS4gIE5vciBhcmUg d2UgdGhlIGdpdCBjb3BzLg0KDQoNCg== From nobody Wed Mar 11 10:00:38 2020 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 8BE4F3A0DFC for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:00:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.887 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ipv-sx.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 qKuq1zy2Jm1G for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk1-x72c.google.com (mail-qk1-x72c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72c]) (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 90BD13A0DB7 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72c.google.com with SMTP id b5so2755996qkh.8 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:00:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=e1YDrS7F4NNvUcqKVPDarbv5QBYiBPGQluyde8cFqdk=; b=yfXmnWzHkLDAbYFWW6ZUpVwGT9iinB08ihLDuv6UO2aKGn11R8rypETl+f56eqE/NC S9KGOYn1QkfmZkQqPEQfdUcSuaBB6upQ7rrBsX7KQkd2m8ihWfWiVau4msecLWiFW7vh gJwIUxBiHD8jOlSE0MvC9pfOszy1dn4i+fahlty0L9tbh4n146halGKvzTLah148cQYJ UNA37rWjXNFqN6Iw98mA+ecCnhXNwG/8htSopAsCY+wEt9BGiHmmttoKYLzMPBUYJ79r 4atHYjcNmZryVe5p9+XEPFSAdYTOn5E9hRaNoRfYGPcVloe/HbqsMcdKOgdYAO+H2pLO SyOQ== 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=e1YDrS7F4NNvUcqKVPDarbv5QBYiBPGQluyde8cFqdk=; b=htqnIPb6N4emCHN9xdWCL/ZA/pOhr25k4fdP+V19RG3deQr6cn3QJOrjTf4PjVjaOv odxC0yz2BIA2dRLi4ioN2TpdBA72h6bjd8BxLd7Jh8sQzRq+/gKsFBwxAJcQL4nxJhcN LjsQ4Tu+O2mtGmvdawg3HWz2jxFBH4vitwAJ0LSKsZgKvT2T5txWLeNMQsp7qZ7PCuYr BLV5g3EtwHn7fRDNNoqJJGBXG+Qk6FRnS+kHPL5N/DvUCyszRA5kASuOorAk8taG4CbO HcdxesowQK+CASsYe9PrEMwUcgy3WKpT8J1BUZc6DVGIqKiyy5fOIBYbzP1+LJpbQ7OL hZag== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0bn8FmZz7HTV1YuQZCDm/MFhgZz1OJ3NlnHC5OXZYp8xjyM7I5 b7Vxvspcj0OUGIsmQjIdcXW38OMqmR9A0Nd19sCPS5vHcFVitg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvI1Lz7CU0ZfjKqJDtVy76ryqbbwy6IQpaYqQobnCnsgcWj/HsGlDt/Zll/1s2qFbThSRtoCsXvMtk4CKCjHkk= X-Received: by 2002:a37:5f07:: with SMTP id t7mr3562997qkb.159.1583946025045; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:00:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Richard Barnes Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:00:07 -0400 Message-ID: To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002aa16705a0972ca2" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 17:00:36 -0000 --0000000000002aa16705a0972ca2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" You can suggest that, but you would be wrong :) We have scope to our process for a reason, namely to prevent surprises late in the process. It's deeply disrespectful to people who have put in a lot of good faith work based on the IESG's express commitment in the charter to say now, "well maybe we shouldn't have chartered this work". And despite Warren's assertion to the contrary, I have trouble reading his objection any other way. The whole point of the group was to recommend practices. --Richard On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 8:38 PM Barry Leiba wrote: > > In the spirit of what Warren says below (and an offlist conversation > I've had with him), may I suggest that -- for the moment, at least -- > we avoid out-of-hand rejection of his DISCUSS as inadmissible, and > instead have at least some of the discussion, with the goal of finding > whether there's something we can say more or differently in the > document that would allay his concerns? > > Warren can always go back to "abstain" after that discussion... or > even "no objection" if the discussion bears fruit. > > Barry --0000000000002aa16705a0972ca2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
You can suggest that, but you would be wrong :)=C2=A0= We have scope to our process for a reason, namely to prevent surprises lat= e in the process.=C2=A0 It's deeply disrespectful to people who have pu= t in a lot of good faith work based on the IESG's express commitment in= the charter to say now, "well maybe we shouldn't have chartered t= his work".=C2=A0

And despite Warren'= s assertion to the contrary, I have trouble reading his objection any other= way.=C2=A0 The whole point of the group was to recommend practices.

--Richard


>
> In the= spirit of what Warren says below (and an offlist conversation
> I&= #39;ve had with him), may I suggest that -- for the moment, at least --
= > we avoid out-of-hand rejection of his DISCUSS as inadmissible, and
= > instead have at least some of the discussion, with the goal of finding=
> whether there's something we can say more or differently in th= e
> document that would allay his concerns?
>
> Warren c= an always go back to "abstain" after that discussion... or
>= ; even "no objection" if the discussion bears fruit.
>
= > Barry

--0000000000002aa16705a0972ca2-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 11:53:43 2020 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 73E1F3A1172; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 11:53:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Alvaro Retana Message-ID: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 11:53:31 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 18:53:38 -0000 Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this document as a BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF community. The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their work will remain entirely at their discretion. However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it represents consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision "to use GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their discretion." My reading of the mailing list is that the current RFC Editor note (in which appending the document to BCP 25 is requested) was added only after the topic was brought up in the Genart LC review. [Did I miss the discussion?] IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this document belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be part of BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to discuss this topic. Not expecting this document to be part of BCP 25, or having an explicit discussion with the community about it, would lead me to clear my DISCUSS. ==== [Non blocking comment. I'm including it here because it is related to the status of the document.] This document would be very good Informational document. I am not a regular GitHub user (and none of the WGs I'm responsible for use it as part of their process), but I have no reason to doubt that the text represents what is believed to be the best way to use GitHub within the IETF process. However, the designation as a BCP can create confusion. [Again, this is a non-blocking comment.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (0) I share Warren's concerns. (1) The datatracker should list draft-thomson-git-using-github as being replaced by this document. (2) It would be nice to have a short terminology section; I assume many people reading this document will not already be GitHub-savy, so push, pull, commits, may not be familiar to them. Alternatively, an Informational pointer to a tutorial would also be ok. (3) Personally, I don't have an issue with the use of GitHub, but some of the statements in the Introduction sound like marketing blurbs, for example: - "Use of this service has been found to reduce the time that Working Groups need to produce documents and to improve the quality of the final result." - "...encourage contributions from a larger set of contributors." - "Using GitHub can also broaden the community of contributors for a specification." (4) [nit] s/This is problematic for contributors who do not track discussion closely./This is problematic for contributors who do not track discussions closely. (5) [major] §5.3: "Working Group chairs SHOULD confirm that the Working Group has consensus to adopt any process." When would the chairs not confirm consensus to adopt a process? IOW, why is this not a MUST? Note that §3 says this: Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining how to best accomplish the charter objectives in an open and transparent fashion. The Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining if there is interest in using GitHub and making a consensus call to determine if the proposed policy and use is acceptable. Even though this text doesn't use rfc2119 keywords, my impression of the intent is that it is required for the chairs to make the consensus call. IOW, I think that this text and the one above (from §5.3) are in conflict. (6) §5.3.2: Gaining Working Group consensus about the resolution of issues can be done in the abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the outcome of discussions as they see fit. This sentence doesn't sound right to me: "consensus...can be done in the abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the outcome...as they see fit". That last part doesn't sound right: Chairs call consensus. Maybe I'm misinterpreting... (7) [major]. Why is draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration listed as a Normative Reference? I don't think that dependency is needed. From nobody Wed Mar 11 11:56:34 2020 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 41DCC3A1143; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 11:56:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Alvaro Retana Message-ID: <158395299219.1461.17797218003531100067@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 11:56:32 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 18:56:32 -0000 Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The datatracker should list draft-cooper-wugh-github-wg-configuration as being replaced by this document. I concur with Mirja's questions about the value of publishing this document given that the Tools Team and the Secretariat are already working towards what it describes. It seems to me that the objectives to spur discussion and reach rough consensus (through the WG and IETF LCs) have been met and that publication is not necessary...except for the fact that this document is currently a Normative reference in draft-ietf-git-using-github... From nobody Wed Mar 11 12:08:37 2020 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 88A7F3A010D; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:08:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=pF3wZU+6; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=oljtTcc1 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 7GGms_kTJP3U; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:08:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E6C43A00E1; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:08:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6891B1; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:08:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:08:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=V qWQNI6xMeekkIVKlqF4x8Np8ZWb+4XRzSYBfFFo7NU=; b=pF3wZU+6+pQVpiTTB GFRWKhwAZPOOnkOREmA2K4BnHt2o1q6uGFCrlFwPHzGbC9/+QxJXOld/DvA0Hvkp Px2Bq6ziMGolBehErWCtRlRAv7U7V08Qn/72f7HU7EzjMFFbbmaIggY5uGcMPxQw mrQ/qqH7P0CpgfLbDvFwWbstviSzAbrU7ISjYt5QWON6Y/qDCy6zYaputgIRh9rY /2fOIqo9xG3ttMJS9TqKWZ0xfhywUpKsSdV/NbV4SY2FxK3sQElbSXEsKIB35PDs qOlaZ5OtJYsVfGOkgxcvHsPnGd+Qgpzu7QVxKyoNCiDDpkep00hLXCw9u7FQ2CYg NONjg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=VqWQNI6xMeekkIVKlqF4x8Np8ZWb+4XRzSYBfFFo7 NU=; b=oljtTcc1Q6PcKC4Y1RfMb3llBSiJQ0KsmjcPO0gcJhMdaSb9H4Fz4/Rd5 DfxOJ+WyDPbnpYYDf8NFpmCjNOGyDRh8vAV/rd+Rk8q5WyihTN+6w/ftdRIDIfUU 2viaUVSPQBbxlGqp8OLJAX+KGPtlmmeKYEM4HOf+4me+0xmhNmiQ/93Z8xWfEo+T X6fu6z5vSmzZj6138NudTexWcAlTfo61i1FvY8HUZEBP0sIE/3K8jZ5rybbXhXhS SDULlzaH1c8LwvzbE9vtTPeXh5xxxLCzj+ozHCLltg39rAt2PU7mV0/OVJtVLRCK Lf5JqkJzeEyvXKKiy7sa4uxNIWBuw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvfedgtdekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtjeenucfhrhhomheptehlihhs shgrucevohhophgvrhcuoegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhnqeenucffohhmrg hinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepudejfedrfeekrddu udejrdekieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhn X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.86]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E69A430614FA; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:08:25 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:08:24 -0400 Cc: Warren Kumari , Eric Rescorla , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , IESG Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Barry Leiba X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 19:08:31 -0000 Personally I would rather see this document switch to informational and = move forward with publication. I don=E2=80=99t think the label =E2=80=9CBC= P=E2=80=9D makes much of a difference, the point is just to document = practices to make it easier for IETF WGs to get their work done. I would = be curious what the WG thinks.=20 Thanks, Alissa > On Mar 10, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Barry Leiba = wrote: >=20 > In the spirit of what Warren says below (and an offlist conversation > I've had with him), may I suggest that -- for the moment, at least -- > we avoid out-of-hand rejection of his DISCUSS as inadmissible, and > instead have at least some of the discussion, with the goal of finding > whether there's something we can say more or differently in the > document that would allay his concerns? >=20 > Warren can always go back to "abstain" after that discussion... or > even "no objection" if the discussion bears fruit. >=20 > Barry >=20 > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:52 PM Warren Kumari = wrote: >>=20 >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:39 PM Alissa Cooper = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Isn=E2=80=99t this really an objection to the entire WG and its = charter, and not to this document specifically? >>=20 >> Not really, but I will grant you that it is close... >>=20 >> A document which explained how to manage discussion between working >> group mailing lists and GitHub issues and pull requests; how text >> contributions are expected to be made; labeling and naming >> conventions; maintaining readable draft snapshots; using tooling and >> automation; informing participants about IETF policies; and other >> information would be useful -- but this does more than that - it >> pushes a (fairly) complex solution, and implies that it is the best >> practice. All of the above could still happen with documents at >> www.github.com/billy-joe-bob, not www.github.com/ietf-important-wg, >> with much less faff, and putting chairs in a "special" position. >>=20 >> W >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Alissa >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Warren Kumari = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> I'm going to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but >>>> this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for >>>> DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.". >>>>=20 >>>> W >>>>=20 >>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> Hi Warren, >>>>>=20 >>>>> I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, = but before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think = applies to this DISCUSS? >>>>>=20 >>>>> -Ekr >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> [0] = https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-criteria/ >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker = wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for >>>>>> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to = all >>>>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to = cut this >>>>>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >>>>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found = here: >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> DISCUSS: >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) = bothering me enough >>>>>> that I'm changing it to a discuss. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, = without good >>>>>> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along = with discussion / >>>>>> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents = include >>>>>> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in = Github at >>>>>> https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent = version of the >>>>>> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. = The authors >>>>>> gratefully accept pull requests. ]" >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, = administering, etc a WG >>>>>> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that = I could find) >>>>>> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use = GitHub (because >>>>>> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own = repos. If WG >>>>>> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone = can find it, and >>>>>> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs = having control and >>>>>> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> COMMENT: >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: >>>>>> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way = for working >>>>>> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter = says: "Whether >>>>>> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to = support their >>>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the = document does let >>>>>> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the = "best" way. I >>>>>> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), = and use that >>>>>> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, = imposing our >>>>>> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as = long at it can be >>>>>> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" = paradigm for a >>>>>> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should = be entirely >>>>>> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is = wrong - and a >>>>>> BCP does that... >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will = not alter the >>>>>> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to = work within it." >>>>>> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - = e.g: "Working >>>>>> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being = managed on >>>>>> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It = has always been >>>>>> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this = doesn't change >>>>>> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / = makes more >>>>>> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place = where is is >>>>>> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change = BCP9. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the = argument that >>>>>> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my = *opinion* the >>>>>> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term = "GitHub" applies >>>>>> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels = very close to >>>>>> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets = with a Bic pen >>>>>> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one = example: >>>>>> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true = of gitea, >>>>>> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub = gives one tool >>>>>> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when = people happen >>>>>> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the = issue tracker >>>>>> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal = convenience >>>>>> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where = decisions get made in >>>>>> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - = this will end up >>>>>> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue = tracker, and >>>>>> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the = decisions made. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG = decides to >>>>>> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or = implicitly) >>>>>> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG = one when a >>>>>> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer = issues between >>>>>> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You = can't transfer >>>>>> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and = they have to be >>>>>> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of = state (I may >>>>>> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document = that talks about >>>>>> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted = version, and what >>>>>> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at >>>>>> www.github.com/wkumari/ to >>>>>> www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved = administrative >>>>>> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I = could see. I >>>>>> think a much much better approach would be have people simple = keep the >>>>>> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption = that moving the >>>>>> repo entails. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea = instance, b: maintain >>>>>> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in = GitHub - but I >>>>>> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is = the "one true >>>>>> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list >>>>>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> -- >>>> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad >>>> idea in the first place. >>>> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later = expressing >>>> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that = pair >>>> of pants. >>>> ---maf >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> -- >> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad >> idea in the first place. >> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later = expressing >> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair >> of pants. >> ---maf >>=20 From nobody Wed Mar 11 12:33:11 2020 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 0200E3A07AD; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:33:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 osL94YU9AEtA; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pl1-x630.google.com (mail-pl1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::630]) (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 BD4093A079F; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:32:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x630.google.com with SMTP id b22so1544436pls.12; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:32:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8WtuJEjwDGLA1YRLD+t1uDJE2OAvMHsFdzPkZyPq6wY=; b=d1utqDxHo5VSDXbxL8gnAM9J8nG/3JsIFrRDpZa5f8lu1BDOUoXN/q7BXhuaiFWjZW 0qnXPN6qQU4VVD5gv26WlNEhYj4XLpfBC0MLhAd/RXK1GTQpzL9j7kBtT/H6YsAd59Qw XccYSaB5cmY2CTZfykHeuB2F7/okwq1OEX9Qj++ixZm6q0Xa3msfH5xgcwDJBck3gXfN fJVXOSmzt828OCaOZkwVFkbagKw0txh4K3i65RNapLnDgwN/QIf5xFTRfzmXi5DYAbHk oVZ1zdQcUcuJ52m4xXtvxch0JB9qf1WsupSPxGaY+L9ro4cUdI9eH+ziga3NTfFhPLps 2ZKA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8WtuJEjwDGLA1YRLD+t1uDJE2OAvMHsFdzPkZyPq6wY=; b=WpSh/E6uwYIqzOMx5T18z4m92PGyHcHmwK9iLcOKHRpXzAH2Z3Tr3L0Hs9ytx6tkWK fY4aIE/5XE8xDMVDgyNHgfGfbHmt6++oqQyi5PGu8ICiGrwx5B6uKOIMH9t8HH5v6V2z W5vJGi2Bbj7OtPU9Mu6KfvRolJ5P8kHUkf/VxyqkvZ+bDUBQ+cSxgfVKqboe6pXAuybh aNbW+Jz6lKivJ97p64/UZA6gAyrRkEw4QUk5XXKJkyjpHs7yJvjtwR879RKjsslWcFnM Z+82wkwi3CXM/oRXXPIPoUClimSz0gRKtq0huRsuoxcf9d+ZOCOuZi2zDs91v0sRsYDB TYzA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0JsnnU0Ozh58JOUZ5JKxLegWLLtO9OYiELbTyMq8cHedmx4nZg eCch3Z6njeMwPzpQiFaWMt8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vunqpjb3/1SijlD5IwEcvWpGz/ZPuvdZ1XoBTGwB+TRfvwCFh0yffV3yOOkbefAOwX5P/DC5w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b58b:: with SMTP id a11mr4607867pls.9.1583955177909; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:32:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.25.143]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x14sm1350805pfn.191.2020.03.11.12.32.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:32:57 -0700 (PDT) To: Alvaro Retana , The IESG Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:32:54 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 19:33:03 -0000 On 12-Mar-20 07:53, Alvaro Retana via Datatracker wrote: =2E.. =20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this document= as a > BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF commun= ity. >=20 > The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >=20 > The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Sta= ndards > Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether w= orking > groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support th= eir work > will remain entirely at their discretion. >=20 > However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working Grou= p > Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it repres= ents > consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision "to us= e GitHub > or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their discretion." Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction help?=20 > My reading of the mailing list is that the current RFC Editor note (in = which > appending the document to BCP 25 is requested) was added only after the= topic > was brought up in the Genart LC review. [Did I miss the discussion?] Speaking as the Gen-ART reviewer, you're correct (and I regret not having= noticed this point earlier so that I could have brought it up in the WG).= > IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this document= belongs > in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be part of BCP = 25, are > the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to discuss this= topic. Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP number?) wa= s typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with a bit of discussi= on with the AD. I certainly don't object to community discussion, of course = (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). Brian > Not expecting this document to be part of BCP 25, or having an explicit= > discussion with the community about it, would lead me to clear my DISCU= SS. >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D > [Non blocking comment. I'm including it here because it is related to = the > status of the document.] >=20 > This document would be very good Informational document. >=20 > I am not a regular GitHub user (and none of the WGs I'm responsible for= use it > as part of their process), but I have no reason to doubt that the text > represents what is believed to be the best way to use GitHub within the= IETF > process. However, the designation as a BCP can create confusion. [Aga= in, this > is a non-blocking comment.] >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 >=20 > (0) I share Warren's concerns. >=20 > (1) The datatracker should list draft-thomson-git-using-github as being= > replaced by this document. >=20 > (2) It would be nice to have a short terminology section; I assume many= people > reading this document will not already be GitHub-savy, so push, pull, c= ommits, > may not be familiar to them. Alternatively, an Informational pointer t= o a > tutorial would also be ok. >=20 > (3) Personally, I don't have an issue with the use of GitHub, but some = of the > statements in the Introduction sound like marketing blurbs, for example= : >=20 > - "Use of this service has been found to reduce the time that Working G= roups > need to produce documents and to improve the quality of the final re= sult." >=20 > - "...encourage contributions from a larger set of contributors." >=20 > - "Using GitHub can also broaden the community of contributors for a > specification." >=20 > (4) [nit] s/This is problematic for contributors who do not track discu= ssion > closely./This is problematic for contributors who do not track discussi= ons > closely. >=20 > (5) [major] =C2=A75.3: "Working Group chairs SHOULD confirm that the W= orking Group > has consensus to adopt any process." When would the chairs not confirm= > consensus to adopt a process? IOW, why is this not a MUST? >=20 > Note that =C2=A73 says this: >=20 > Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining how to best > accomplish the charter objectives in an open and transparent fashion= =2E > The Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining if there is= > interest in using GitHub and making a consensus call to determine if= > the proposed policy and use is acceptable. >=20 > Even though this text doesn't use rfc2119 keywords, my impression of th= e intent > is that it is required for the chairs to make the consensus call. IOW,= I think > that this text and the one above (from =C2=A75.3) are in conflict. >=20 > (6) =C2=A75.3.2: >=20 > Gaining Working Group consensus about the resolution of issues can b= e > done in the abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the > outcome of discussions as they see fit. >=20 > This sentence doesn't sound right to me: "consensus...can be done in th= e > abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the outcome...as they= see > fit". That last part doesn't sound right: Chairs call consensus. Mayb= e I'm > misinterpreting... >=20 > (7) [major]. Why is draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration listed as a > Normative Reference? I don't think that dependency is needed. >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >=20 From nobody Wed Mar 11 12:34:18 2020 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 5798A3A07A0 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:34:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0LbD8D_D6wKC for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:34:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22b.google.com (mail-lj1-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 0C3E53A07B9 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:34:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22b.google.com with SMTP id o10so3663887ljc.8 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:34:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5d/LIxmSOQ/R/qF86MCURPULLQdQfhAAVHIQ9x4VEfQ=; b=DXVI5pYOrd2QJlzniSXu583mrQmpe3Vx7HR2eZavhrhycgKf23kdq2kn+awEL0tLKa C9d8D8z3nsFO1UIb992kKmEQFuHsDdQPfXIKDjfLXXi2IsPJiYzY1MzzczFAWNKMogkK VFE+ko0BL2q3Jo1O9HKSRCSk1fuKVliquGbp31kvjjrc/cxhhjRqJJCfsEw5W/az3rX1 o1B6n/w//5U/9VuAZwo4ckvScbHXwD3r2VLU40k/TXub+g0QVOsNEFMEeaI0E+KWd9xH 13xmQVBPqhV1NY8RgBIjjlb1ueQ1A+uPjFVX7FhRqv2WLHr3s/69wzqbX+GrqwuMSPk3 DgHw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5d/LIxmSOQ/R/qF86MCURPULLQdQfhAAVHIQ9x4VEfQ=; b=ZZnOSlN9WH3J9Da0kHAW3gDGpe0uTKD/w6tJm3ooh4xIWA+jAa11N0JvHjsXZ8VkoS TCFVN3yGy76ZzSnSjPq5MKyxF32oIqGJg10y2Ii1WSU+Pepe0VDEXpZHaMbWuNPop9/R 2z9RGj+VLRIxsTd/kaHJHIJK6GomD0KIJjJZ4cyNtCuJSpvbIea8G91CdLbqGlMigIyD TZ+lqj4kiAPoPgyOmFcTbgw3sg/n8hYVsCc8j71kq0LSsZerQDo6vFC6cQWWYLF5n1q0 pwtvAooM/j52tM7qeNBrVlobHh16uBtDfY4xs/ViDQAQztr7hM5hCT13sAunGHTozn1X LWLg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3LeVe7ewMW9Ia+6ZEaQjCB7z4u/aVE/0AvaAuRU/Td4eEanZY6 wXNeSrkcsoAfPbb8ndRN+Njt2BkNKO/jwMtozLI0BQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvWmI0TeoL2i5RScnxd2k5Nn5kzHnxaODDZmBdcIafeVEDlYtLgg8vyJw8FUxW3xSzMtVqWDkF65ej6AnNaDE8= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a366:: with SMTP id i6mr2892627ljn.198.1583955244668; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:34:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> In-Reply-To: <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> From: Warren Kumari Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:33:27 -0400 Message-ID: To: Alissa Cooper Cc: Barry Leiba , Eric Rescorla , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , IESG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 19:34:12 -0000 On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:08 PM Alissa Cooper wrote: > > Personally I would rather see this document switch to informational and m= ove forward with publication. If this changes from BCP to Informational, I will happily change my DISCUSS to Abstain (a non-blocking position). I'd also like to thank Martin and Rich for trying to constructively address my concerns - I'm sure they dislike trying to address my DISCUSS at least as much as I dislike holding it... W > I don=E2=80=99t think the label =E2=80=9CBCP=E2=80=9D makes much of a dif= ference, the point is just to document practices to make it easier for IETF= WGs to get their work done. I would be curious what the WG thinks. > > Thanks, > Alissa > > > > On Mar 10, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Barry Leiba wrot= e: > > > > In the spirit of what Warren says below (and an offlist conversation > > I've had with him), may I suggest that -- for the moment, at least -- > > we avoid out-of-hand rejection of his DISCUSS as inadmissible, and > > instead have at least some of the discussion, with the goal of finding > > whether there's something we can say more or differently in the > > document that would allay his concerns? > > > > Warren can always go back to "abstain" after that discussion... or > > even "no objection" if the discussion bears fruit. > > > > Barry > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:52 PM Warren Kumari wrote= : > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:39 PM Alissa Cooper wrot= e: > >>> > >>> Isn=E2=80=99t this really an objection to the entire WG and its chart= er, and not to this document specifically? > >> > >> Not really, but I will grant you that it is close... > >> > >> A document which explained how to manage discussion between working > >> group mailing lists and GitHub issues and pull requests; how text > >> contributions are expected to be made; labeling and naming > >> conventions; maintaining readable draft snapshots; using tooling and > >> automation; informing participants about IETF policies; and other > >> information would be useful -- but this does more than that - it > >> pushes a (fairly) complex solution, and implies that it is the best > >> practice. All of the above could still happen with documents at > >> www.github.com/billy-joe-bob, not www.github.com/ietf-important-wg, > >> with much less faff, and putting chairs in a "special" position. > >> > >> W > >> > >>> > >>> Alissa > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Warren Kumari wrote= : > >>>> > >>>> I'm going to take option C: "This cannot be an exhaustive list, but > >>>> this set should be taken as exemplary of the common causes for > >>>> DISCUSSes seen by the IESG in the past.". > >>>> > >>>> W > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:01 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Warren, > >>>>> > >>>>> I've got some thoughts about the merits of this DISCUSS comment, bu= t before I do that, which of the DISCUSS criteria [0] do you think applies = to this DISCUSS? > >>>>> > >>>>> -Ekr > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> [0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/iesg-discuss-crit= eria/ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:45 AM Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > >>>>>> draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss > >>>>>> > >>>>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to = all > >>>>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut= this > >>>>>> introductory paragraph, however.) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criter= ia.html > >>>>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here= : > >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ---- > >>>>>> DISCUSS: > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ---- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I originally balloted Abstain, but this is (and has been) botherin= g me enough > >>>>>> that I'm changing it to a discuss. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This feels like additional centralization / control / process, wit= hout good > >>>>>> justification. I happen to use GitHub for my documents (along with= discussion / > >>>>>> agreement with co-authors), but in personal repos. Our documents i= nclude > >>>>>> something like: "[ This document is being collaborated on in Githu= b at > >>>>>> https://github.com/wkumari/. The most recent version= of the > >>>>>> document, open issues, and so on should all be available there. T= he authors > >>>>>> gratefully accept pull requests. ]" > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This document contains a lot of text about setting up, administeri= ng, etc a WG > >>>>>> organization / repos -- but there is no good justification (that I= could find) > >>>>>> on what advantages this has over simply encouraging people use Git= Hub (because > >>>>>> it is easy, and well known), and keeping things in their own repos= . If WG > >>>>>> documents include a pointer (like above) to the repo, everyone can= find it, and > >>>>>> we don't need all this. This smacks of scope-creep / chairs having= control and > >>>>>> process where it a: isn't needed and b: isn't helpful. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ---- > >>>>>> COMMENT: > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ---- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I spent a while trying to decide between Abstain and DISCUSS. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: > >>>>>> 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way f= or working > >>>>>> groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter say= s: "Whether > >>>>>> working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to = support their > >>>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the docume= nt does let > >>>>>> WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best"= way. I > >>>>>> happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), a= nd use that > >>>>>> to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, impos= ing our > >>>>>> working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long= at it can be > >>>>>> turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" pa= radigm for a > >>>>>> reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be= entirely > >>>>>> their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is w= rong - and a > >>>>>> BCP does that... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will = not alter the > >>>>>> Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work= within it." > >>>>>> but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g= : "Working > >>>>>> Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being man= aged on > >>>>>> Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has= always been > >>>>>> clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this does= n't change > >>>>>> it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / mak= es more > >>>>>> places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place = where is is > >>>>>> really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP= 9. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the = argument that > >>>>>> it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *o= pinion* the > >>>>>> right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "Gi= tHub" applies > >>>>>> to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels v= ery close to > >>>>>> the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets wi= th a Bic pen > >>>>>> when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one ex= ample: > >>>>>> "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true o= f gitea, > >>>>>> gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives= one tool > >>>>>> prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when p= eople happen > >>>>>> to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the is= sue tracker > >>>>>> to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal = convenience > >>>>>> -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decision= s get made in > >>>>>> the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this= will end up > >>>>>> with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue trac= ker, and > >>>>>> those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisi= ons made. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG de= cides to > >>>>>> fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or i= mplicitly) > >>>>>> disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG on= e when a > >>>>>> document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issue= s between > >>>>>> repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You c= an't transfer > >>>>>> an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and th= ey have to be > >>>>>> (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of sta= te (I may > >>>>>> also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that= talks about > >>>>>> migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted vers= ion, and what > >>>>>> should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at > >>>>>> www.github.com/wkumari/ to > >>>>>> www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administ= rative > >>>>>> annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I co= uld see. I > >>>>>> think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep= the > >>>>>> documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that= moving the > >>>>>> repo entails. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance= , b: maintain > >>>>>> a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in G= itHub - but I > >>>>>> really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is t= he "one true > >>>>>> way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >>>>>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > >>>> idea in the first place. > >>>> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressi= ng > >>>> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > >>>> of pants. > >>>> ---maf > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > >> idea in the first place. > >> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > >> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > >> of pants. > >> ---maf > >> > --=20 I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Wed Mar 11 12:41:45 2020 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 145153A07D6; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:41:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 l_M1FiCqhehK; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:41:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 D18583A07EF; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050093.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02BJYO6S020729; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:41:28 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=LDz5LhJKsiUUcVx0QvE8/UA/8k066mDgmGs13iXWdvE=; b=fe+TwBgO74pLCXQkxHTYsw6ZTH0FKgGRezu4hvYPRzB2LL8c/D+k8LlddBiva6H7nCdf lQWAUT0cV3ZQN/aPTdbIACcpS1E3gkUj0yNAMJD8NW5H0jqGbKpYygVmqAsNaIYhWsnE CzTAGc5IOigdhDhyEMgLLf23CK6gzx74SWiYSwiAkaG9l9fwSAHFjN1JsiAWmYSN0t8z nnaukebUeRgLynWq+uTI8yf2unxUGj3sf0TZxqxnkfEbkaHcjVEvhutAq0InpUv4vihi ahXOGwwBipot0jtvAJXtG04qqycQ8qyfRCSjS1NeHTnjP1Amn1h7y5EggltZquHe1fKO Hw== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint3 (prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com [96.6.114.86] (may be forged)) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2ym3rw2r2d-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:41:27 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02BJW9Fh005553; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:41:26 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.53]) by prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ym7u33aq4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:41:25 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:41:24 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:41:24 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:41:24 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Alissa Cooper CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , IESG Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV9wOs0vc4R5Bmh0K0p/JgSY2pi6hCYMgAgAAJ9QCAAACogIAAA4cAgAAdrACAAXlOAP//xioA Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:41:24 +0000 Message-ID: <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> In-Reply-To: <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.112.82] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-11_10:2020-03-11, 2020-03-11 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=946 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002050000 definitions=main-2003110109 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-11_10:2020-03-11, 2020-03-11 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=910 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2003110109 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 19:41:44 -0000 PiAgICBQZXJzb25hbGx5IEkgd291bGQgcmF0aGVyIHNlZSB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IHN3aXRjaCB0 byBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbmFsIGFuZCBtb3ZlIGZvcndhcmQgd2l0aCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4gSSBkb27i gJl0IHRoaW5rIHRoZSBsYWJlbCDigJxCQ1DigJ0gbWFrZXMgbXVjaCBvZiBhIGRpZmZlcmVuY2Us IHRoZSBwb2ludCBpcyBqdXN0IHRvIGRvY3VtZW50IHByYWN0aWNlcyB0byBtYWtlIGl0IGVhc2ll ciBmb3IgSUVURiBXR3MgdG8gZ2V0IHRoZWlyIHdvcmsgZG9uZS4gSSB3b3VsZCBiZSBjdXJpb3Vz IHdoYXQgdGhlIFdHIHRoaW5rcy4gDQogIA0KV2UgZG8gdGhpbmsgdGhpcyBpcyB0aGUgYmVzdCB3 YXlzIHRvIGRvIHRoaW5ncywgYnV0IGlmIHRoZSBCQ1AgbGFiZWwgaGFzIHBlb3BsZSB0aWVkIHVw IGluIGtub3RzLCBpdCdzIGJldHRlciB0byBwdWJsaXNoIHRoYW4gZGVsYXkgYW5kIGJlIHJpZ2h0 LiAgSSBjYW4gbGl2ZSB3aXRoIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uYWwuDQoNCg0K From nobody Wed Mar 11 12:52:32 2020 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 83FC93A0847; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:52:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=heapingbits.net header.b=AJcwRvnN; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=XYLw/3xg 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 Qq65mDMedtgx; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:52:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1650B3A083C; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:52:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C4421DC4; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:52:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap4 ([10.202.2.54]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:52:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heapingbits.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm3; bh=GMxoUV/KlLzywxEzhjCKsFZfrtjG /AvNk3QkR0lxC1Q=; b=AJcwRvnNtUwnb2ezC76KZlfukQW4coU+XSoPszywJtjg CpA2vWimBXU/Df7D1b4dYlbq897+Awq9eF+SXxM2cuA8HMX0DL5CyhnocDR/pG5D N3jh3eLF5APMvYrMRnXcAELfCoGkjswYF5y4lhRWqTzJdVQD1zT48EjscJVvMUkY 28c0EvS0Vrc6QHuevDIzKHFM50FxDro4q3+QONxORSTGTeWvAAWQW2JR5Q1PYaub RVL1afeHzEPeGWKKf62pG50bunK1Zg4CTc969ZOT5gGj5p8LaqLT4UFY9awpVoSH W7EZDhbmyBDiEPRNRItSbgKaLPctJL1Utgp45DRfqA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=GMxoUV /KlLzywxEzhjCKsFZfrtjG/AvNk3QkR0lxC1Q=; b=XYLw/3xgXC8V9mSpjo0HnT TGhKM7qolwth1B6OPxtEnNnRuIqEL6d2wSoKNrklyHy2d6yVMVFsNwLYux6C3FEj W4+03N9ZB4nA1teBqeucRByJWDfj6kXUI50jReFy9A5nKtfqfw6Zi25rNL0uZ3DJ C64KAoxMMswTLnsBx5DWe+sITyuwgCH/diveN79JHp8kqS9aakvRLhsnFcEJFW3O lGrHYGwd1CHxSHk1VZ2cEU1+IFDN2um13dodCVANC9c0xErffBWziZxHFYnWMaec HV9rjRN9O3AXkP53zoTkdEFxUNaYVDkEnjDuaYvw4f9Wb8rSKyK/q9wo1VF/Wgmg == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvfedgudehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdevhhhr ihhsthhophhhvghrucghohhougdfuceotggrfieshhgvrghpihhnghgsihhtshdrnhgvth eqnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheptggr fieshhgvrghpihhnghgsihhtshdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id D5AFA3C00A1; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:52:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <27ae1193-3a5f-497d-a2a0-336b50f73d78@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:52:02 -0700 From: "Christopher Wood" To: "Warren Kumari" , "Alissa Cooper" Cc: "Barry Leiba" , "Eric Rescorla" , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "The IESG" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Warren_Kumari=27s_Discuss_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 19:52:26 -0000 On Wed, Mar 11, 2020, at 12:33 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:08 PM Alissa Cooper wrote: > > > > Personally I would rather see this document switch to informational and move forward with publication. > > If this changes from BCP to Informational, I will happily change my > DISCUSS to Abstain (a non-blocking position). This seems like a fine path forward! > I'd also like to thank Martin and Rich for trying to constructively > address my concerns - I'm sure they dislike trying to address my > DISCUSS at least as much as I dislike holding it... Heavy +1 -- thank you both for moving the conversation forward. Best, Chris From nobody Wed Mar 11 12:59:03 2020 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 D9C0A3A0870 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:58:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jjy_a40FF5ib for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com (mail-lj1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 59CEC3A0871 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id f13so3786871ljp.0 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:58:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6S75fy5aqgEgmlZLbhfxQQfHmgnEQ6IChILiO7WKI1I=; b=HESNjdprWc5PDM9s3f4IGVRUyWSQsFoe1QfBzLtGZAa5nC95h6mF8No7LPlECNJ9o6 uWFBDc0s/TJUXBAr+1WX7ZO5427USHNRc6nuKL0AbM65eq+Sj8do4mLappqpAL/NHhwb 4Hh7CJDzuNrJA5aOrtQEVyg2X9+YVqNui50Pbcp6h9fF0JD23YgtDPF44zTbKnrkki06 Kqp5iAK/7TzoxFW8TzBPffeMvdtrOlf4iK7k2bAhuARv7lYkmItX96Wf3xC9fqHoLry6 3NqkMK5owUHYi7i6OaSkRlICh7K/JNlmH0r5ZUG+HrLYbxVL/K3r4uPaE78Z3OHjr3JF 2Oyw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6S75fy5aqgEgmlZLbhfxQQfHmgnEQ6IChILiO7WKI1I=; b=Y9D1KMuEha+44UO+qC/uIO7V4gyZjytXca9S9ImCESo0gRUkedY2KWJTHoJkO4MVTX nalaRcYfawH0PZhcst/OGh/5bN44YW5cHEbHQvnAzsLOzNH0b2SZF6rpwytnZTBmzUmJ Ii/1dhAYM+3tc0KQrDRXf7aZ34y1bYn6EwxVBHJTxn1ZmlKSe9aCpZu7pxcK7/f/mbKG 6rxZ9QATc9jgGFe3mk3OkMR6UNPy+aktPKkdq8TvmbafVY+7Jw2Np8Kj5GYZ8PecqUwL IoJxVUo02Q1FAPbvmjzLQppz/6Zr2+ll1YTj7qiyg48O56ayBX3FsINzFJRRJdJb4xvP FgRw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0NoBhHf/r03losXy6bB4hcPeeLu7yuPMMm2aX6j2M5APjz8i0m XvukdkBEhsuKFhR1duYUwAU+eycJrFFwn9oxVvYjz51Ym4SqGA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsOVCxIlwTX/ZpH7V5USFk5FKF5nIISrK6pSAHCV8KWJJ+bIlzB3gIsNA54r8o3nsmPgW3nqIL0ld+uCRxwcuU= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8597:: with SMTP id b23mr3076356lji.181.1583956732220; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:58:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> From: Warren Kumari Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:58:15 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Salz, Rich" Cc: Alissa Cooper , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , IESG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 19:58:57 -0000 On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:41 PM Salz, Rich wrote: > > > Personally I would rather see this document switch to informational = and move forward with publication. I don=E2=80=99t think the label =E2=80= =9CBCP=E2=80=9D makes much of a difference, the point is just to document p= ractices to make it easier for IETF WGs to get their work done. I would be = curious what the WG thinks. > > We do think this is the best ways to do things, but if the BCP label has = people tied up in knots, it's better to publish than delay and be right. I= can live with informational. Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to be: "This document describes best practices for Working Groups that choose to use GitHub for their work." and leave it as BCP. Would that work better for everyone? It would be enough for me to no longer feel that this is saying that WGs using GitHub is a BCP, but rather that if a WG decided to use GitHub, this is the best way to do so (I'm still not sure that this really is the best way, but that's just my opinion, and I'm OK being in the rough) W > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github --=20 I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Wed Mar 11 13:18:25 2020 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 E514E3A0994; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:18:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=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=isoc.org 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 kbQOdIY9ysqV; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:18:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAM10-BN7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn7nam10on2060f.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:7e8a::60f]) (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 658BE3A0989; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:18:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=UeRy4sqbu6zCIvt6lXbSIEjrRhxdDCXqfjCWRXLqPUG4n6SNvBKJpk0Bn1Ipi29m67gGObqguVYb0mq/5EYf7AAQ2vs3AtogjbM9IWH6dXQQhP874aZtCQYjRNRE+oxds3C+h+ZR6i2wCjlXEkhbiwD0P4gLy2L62Xoxa+uuOmeAugVXySLA3tukVihS1x7hbn49UFTgvThD1PCVo0miy3d5rVyazfLTHfZdDKbwK+X+5KaEGae/kNef3HqV7b7yJyOl6QssQGc7WnkavPxYwzWhLIeoIGRxbQNHmclhJ9TvNn6edXX/dO5JlASWTypEPY+ddVQXnLZLYEKRtSkQzQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=+EQ144hVY1EDbttdia4EnZAf2/SofkVVzmnEdwbdQ3U=; b=Rvy2j5HVVdwX6cklss76By6FBGxfHyBMM0FR7VjljL8V5QFec8dERSRhNeO/JBjBLYA36P+oEerepLBLZkRkhVgaXmRuC+3949sCcc/xsPhuZ/ZvQpslJFqf9JtTNzvZIfnxitKOZXRsfb+eEFLSgideeZOHn5ajAvSuTGfsHX45tJtm55ON/g/NQJSGMwGkbGk2GSIXe2S6uV9tyV6BwIliC5Y68yNpnqjorb1kLGbn3bcm9gApLsSA/ylA4CQ3KLWBAhywnVKs+AFs1mlDfTHTq4lVR+3SCA8NUKUkarWUZ7BtYrjg2zquUtu8mDsoH80lZvEckXV3UVbrdstb4Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=isoc.org; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=isoc.org; dkim=pass header.d=isoc.org; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.org; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=+EQ144hVY1EDbttdia4EnZAf2/SofkVVzmnEdwbdQ3U=; b=y5PQksyCgeb4WtLMI9lRI4MzTfjpzOFlf1T4e+bEGbtZSQjfn7i6i7/ye9a7xoM2FVDNwYAcxEm2Oy2dnjOm7noT5sCcqHl+n9H4lY6cXO1G9e36fyrcRLHMSNKrim3THIcX2/QV67LKFTsX/Vmqjgm/vd+cgiAFkyOxFEFSjNc= Received: from BY5PR06MB6451.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:21e::20) by BY5PR06MB6452.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:230::15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.16; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:18:14 +0000 Received: from BY5PR06MB6451.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3891:1ca6:1667:cbd]) by BY5PR06MB6451.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3891:1ca6:1667:cbd%2]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.018; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:18:13 +0000 From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall To: Warren Kumari , "Salz, Rich" CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Alissa Cooper , IESG Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV9wOua66tbLpVhUOjGOTs2x4vpahCHboAgAAJ9QCAAACogIAAA4YAgAAdrACAAXlPAIAACTgAgAAEtoCAAAVv/w== Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:18:13 +0000 Message-ID: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com>, In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=hall@isoc.org; x-originating-ip: [173.73.251.251] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1c969d1f-168c-4482-5c37-08d7c5f953d1 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BY5PR06MB6452: x-ld-processed: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f,ExtAddr x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 0339F89554 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(136003)(366004)(376002)(39840400004)(346002)(396003)(199004)(966005)(19627405001)(9686003)(52536014)(55016002)(2906002)(186003)(4326008)(6506007)(7696005)(71200400001)(53546011)(5660300002)(110136005)(316002)(86362001)(478600001)(8676002)(26005)(66476007)(81156014)(66946007)(64756008)(66446008)(81166006)(66556008)(33656002)(8936002)(91956017)(76116006)(54906003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BY5PR06MB6452; H:BY5PR06MB6451.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: isoc.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: +TcxOABNN1sgDBA3R3nOkZbw+ig2rPPx/5ogfPzz2LABS/jgSFh4stMlCLVKcownAEX9BB+cwpbfqdxBH2X8KABRwSXwUVYYcfYjSZ3xXFwtdn3A8tcfuDWNK14t4ttJtNpDtbZBy17WawJH4/0FDw== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BY5PR06MB64517DB35ECF9DE2361325A3B1FC0BY5PR06MB6451namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1c969d1f-168c-4482-5c37-08d7c5f953d1 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 11 Mar 2020 20:18:13.8379 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: enQBeMmC/IuwVqDvlzMyOpOwHj1L3iO80S8Notsq/1mKZK/jrwVjkLN1szod9KJs X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY5PR06MB6452 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 20:18:19 -0000 --_000_BY5PR06MB64517DB35ECF9DE2361325A3B1FC0BY5PR06MB6451namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I like this solution ________________________________ From: Ietf-and-github on behalf of Warre= n Kumari Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 15:58 To: Salz, Rich Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org ; Alissa Cooper ; IESG Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-us= ing-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:41 PM Salz, Rich wrote: > > > Personally I would rather see this document switch to informational = and move forward with publication. I don=92t think the label =93BCP=94 make= s much of a difference, the point is just to document practices to make it = easier for IETF WGs to get their work done. I would be curious what the WG = thinks. > > We do think this is the best ways to do things, but if the BCP label has = people tied up in knots, it's better to publish than delay and be right. I= can live with informational. Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to be: "This document describes best practices for Working Groups that choose to use GitHub for their work." and leave it as BCP. Would that work better for everyone? It would be enough for me to no longer feel that this is saying that WGs using GitHub is a BCP, but rather that if a WG decided to use GitHub, this is the best way to do so (I'm still not sure that this really is the best way, but that's just my opinion, and I'm OK being in the rough) W > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf _______________________________________________ Ietf-and-github mailing list Ietf-and-github@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github --_000_BY5PR06MB64517DB35ECF9DE2361325A3B1FC0BY5PR06MB6451namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I like this solution
From: Ietf-and-github <i= etf-and-github-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Warren Kumari <warren@k= umari.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 15:58
To: Salz, Rich <rsalz=3D40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org <ietf-and-github@ietf.org>; Aliss= a Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>; IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf= -git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
 
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:41 PM Salz, Rich
<rsalz=3D40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> >    Personally I would rather see this document swi= tch to informational and move forward with publication. I don=92t think the= label =93BCP=94 makes much of a difference, the point is just to document = practices to make it easier for IETF WGs to get their work done. I would be curious what the WG thinks.
>
> We do think this is the best ways to do things, but if the BCP label h= as people tied up in knots, it's better to publish than delay and be right.=   I can live with informational.

Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to be:
"This document describes best practices for Working Groups that choose=
to use GitHub for their work."
and leave it as BCP.

Would that work better for everyone? It would be enough for me to no
longer feel that this is saying that WGs using GitHub is a BCP, but
rather that if a WG decided to use GitHub, this is the best way to do
so (I'm still not sure that this really is the best way, but that's
just my opinion, and I'm OK being in the rough)

W



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



--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
https://w= ww.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
--_000_BY5PR06MB64517DB35ECF9DE2361325A3B1FC0BY5PR06MB6451namp_-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 13:36:37 2020 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 8D58B3A0C55; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:36:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 8JZlKda4w9sy; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppa3.lax.icann.org (ppa3.lax.icann.org [192.0.33.78]) (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 D349C3A0C31; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from PFE112-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (out.west.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.7]) by ppa3.lax.icann.org (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with ESMTPS id 02BKaKa6032481 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:36:20 GMT Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:36:19 -0700 Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:36:18 -0700 From: Paul Hoffman To: Mirja Kuehlewind CC: IESG , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: =?iso-8859-1?Q?[Ext]_Mirja_K=FChlewind's_Discuss_on_draft-ietf-git-github?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?-wg-configuration-06:_(with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT)?= Thread-Index: AQHV9+S4Y+SHpwHzjU60pshw92hVpg== Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:36:18 +0000 Message-ID: <35046BE2-7120-492F-AE1C-DA74FA1AA2C8@icann.org> References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234] x-source-routing-agent: Processed Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_739725C1-3C32-47F3-936C-A5FBD6C31663"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-11_11:2020-03-11, 2020-03-11 signatures=0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?iso-8859-1?q?=5BExt=5D_Mirja_K=FChlewind=27s?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_Discuss_on_draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 20:36:31 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_739725C1-3C32-47F3-936C-A5FBD6C31663 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Catching up on the rest of Mirja's comments (not already discussed on = this thread) >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> COMMENT: >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>=20 >>> Other questions/comments: >>>=20 >>> 1) Sec 2.3: >>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personnel = changes." >>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this = sentence really >>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or = GitHub) and >>> what is should do? We will change "API" to "ability in the Datatracker". >>>=20 >>> 2) Sec 2.5: >>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" >>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be = maintained within >>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or = desirable: >>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There >>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. Some chairs have indicated it is desirable, so the WG thought it should = be possible. >>>=20 >>> 3) Also sec 2.5: >>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a >>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of = an >>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new >>> repository within that organization for a single document." >>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit it = to the >>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does = not seems >>> too useful... Document authors can tell the WG chairs that they intend to create a new = WG draft. If that happens, the WG chair creates the repo with either the = intended draft name or something semantically relevant, and tells the = document authors before they turn in the -00. (I think this has already = happened in some WGs...) >>>=20 >>> 4) Sec 2.6: >>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." >>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you can = add link to >>> external pages? This is currently true for chairs for their WGs, but not for authors in = their document page. --Paul Hoffman= --Apple-Mail=_739725C1-3C32-47F3-936C-A5FBD6C31663 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExDzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFADCABgkqhkiG9w0BBwEAAKCCC/Qw ggWeMIIEhqADAgECAhAG83jiXlqePPrfwUUEH4ZnMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAMGUxCzAJBgNVBAYT AlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20xJDAi BgNVBAMTG0RpZ2lDZXJ0IFNIQTIgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBDQTAeFw0xODA2MTMwMDAwMDBaFw0yMTA2 MTMxMjAwMDBaMIG9MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzETMBEGA1UECBMKQ2FsaWZvcm5pYTEUMBIGA1UEBxML TG9zIEFuZ2VsZXMxPDA6BgNVBAoTM0ludGVybmV0IENvcnBvcmF0aW9uIGZvciBBc3NpZ25lZCBO YW1lcyBhbmQgTnVtYmVyczEeMBwGA1UEAxMVUGF1bCBIb2ZmbWFuIDIwMTgwNjEzMSUwIwYJKoZI hvcNAQkBFhZwYXVsLmhvZmZtYW5AaWNhbm4ub3JnMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIB CgKCAQEArTbxBbfxbk1VxDQsOmEm14Yta2AE5cBcJ/ktMkC+aQrTCMSXrQJfjiMUUndnfAT1DWcf jg706vvITa1lkFaLoF9b6cNICMKsibFruFy8ZA2bsIPRXPPzSsY6zibdStNCpruNTQoiL9bIxlQp qRUx/BfvHAhS7g5dAOcRgkpW9Q4Si5bl6A2qS0ImIMzktNcVxrWAn0HsG9u8cKcSCBJxavRAnMt/ XhE7tCICjyoeoprYZ2ztmdZUL6UgMNrDz/KoeNHAWzTAH45hn1Jz1IguGLM/M2Vb8mF8eP3wAh4p MVIi2jCwNqC497R8x0lsNryoG+uy/26nK6fhCTqVfF6hgQIDAQABo4IB7zCCAeswHwYDVR0jBBgw FoAU5wIjgABP2Ne8lAvZP3Q5STI8inkwHQYDVR0OBBYEFD+ST5hEHbTuHJZT9husDN7VLQdgMAwG A1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwIQYDVR0RBBowGIEWcGF1bC5ob2ZmbWFuQGljYW5uLm9yZzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8E BAMCBaAwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMEMGA1UdIAQ8MDowOAYKYIZIAYb9 bAQBAjAqMCgGCCsGAQUFBwIBFhxodHRwczovL3d3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vQ1BTMIGIBgNVHR8E gYAwfjA9oDugOYY3aHR0cDovL2NybDMuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0RpZ2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFzc3VyZWRJ RENBLWcyLmNybDA9oDugOYY3aHR0cDovL2NybDQuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0RpZ2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFz c3VyZWRJRENBLWcyLmNybDB5BggrBgEFBQcBAQRtMGswJAYIKwYBBQUHMAGGGGh0dHA6Ly9vY3Nw LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTBDBggrBgEFBQcwAoY3aHR0cDovL2NhY2VydHMuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0Rp Z2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFzc3VyZWRJRENBLmNydDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFAAOCAQEAA7vGiITVJvEIgFN3 UVszD4nyt8ks8d/Ik5Uj1jPuD8+NX4lBpDOIvfYkCn8KYSrx+sMQrpoS2enbOMwekef3tObl2hVK 2Q+tv1GksPq9tQ98Ab1Odv1IM9aYaU1alR5/EEhc0uqs1Ulz2WUc8x/anf3/IpbHyEPdOCLiL9mi b4GDM8z9mqvAE+MtisqRs2+wlMzC/63sNKpA6KdfBNKMLHnyqCAKF7luGWp612yPmGoh63bBLrpR JQorI/fsv5SE2pK3Xf53W/ELf6sxWMsXm9iEgMeoAOtDeJHrv+i+vlldwHHJK6zlXIdVrjxRklyg ISXmlsdHs/sDp1MEqZTOXDCCBk4wggU2oAMCAQICEASueWBmZpAaucV/pmxb3M0wDQYJKoZIhvcN AQELBQAwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3 LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBSb290IENBMB4XDTEz MTEwNTEyMDAwMFoXDTI4MTEwNTEyMDAwMFowZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lD ZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgU0hB MiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA3PgRIz9qte/A J3kbLQWHohBDMd8O1BUbT3ekIs4+jHDwvgeO3ScqvAEdtiwKyt1pWB9B7WoFH9pjeFkeIiwr+Lp+ yTU7VvEffEJ+JbAjGcZFONc9RPkgfGCuHLBaGAS+jzv3qfCUmqYMY0m2QRdTQDK9T+ZQelAfJUXo 8Ymvzf9e/1Dz8BcR/73FifW9YrnY+45FBIVtmc3FSE39JqsCNkXqNtdfauIagkEK3OnZ9ZEXjsYh rTg8E+Yef2ac1U3ZRtr2z1KnfTskw7TBUTXGm+vU737kewPhRL16CzfgT8uCig1xGOSm4IksG/Oy czzBsJKeGH29q33FfQihLMKfcwIDAQABo4IC+DCCAvQwEgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB/wIBADAOBgNV HQ8BAf8EBAMCAYYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEKDAmMCQGCCsGAQUFBzABhhhodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5kaWdp Y2VydC5jb20wgYEGA1UdHwR6MHgwOqA4oDaGNGh0dHA6Ly9jcmw0LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9EaWdp Q2VydEFzc3VyZWRJRFJvb3RDQS5jcmwwOqA4oDaGNGh0dHA6Ly9jcmwzLmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9E aWdpQ2VydEFzc3VyZWRJRFJvb3RDQS5jcmwwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwME MIIBswYDVR0gBIIBqjCCAaYwggGiBgpghkgBhv1sAAIEMIIBkjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cHM6 Ly93d3cuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0NQUzCCAWQGCCsGAQUFBwICMIIBVh6CAVIAQQBuAHkAIAB1AHMA ZQAgAG8AZgAgAHQAaABpAHMAIABDAGUAcgB0AGkAZgBpAGMAYQB0AGUAIABjAG8AbgBzAHQAaQB0 AHUAdABlAHMAIABhAGMAYwBlAHAAdABhAG4AYwBlACAAbwBmACAAdABoAGUAIABEAGkAZwBpAEMA ZQByAHQAIABDAFAALwBDAFAAUwAgAGEAbgBkACAAdABoAGUAIABSAGUAbAB5AGkAbgBnACAAUABh AHIAdAB5ACAAQQBnAHIAZQBlAG0AZQBuAHQAIAB3AGgAaQBjAGgAIABsAGkAbQBpAHQAIABsAGkA YQBiAGkAbABpAHQAeQAgAGEAbgBkACAAYQByAGUAIABpAG4AYwBvAHIAcABvAHIAYQB0AGUAZAAg AGgAZQByAGUAaQBuACAAYgB5ACAAcgBlAGYAZQByAGUAbgBjAGUALjAdBgNVHQ4EFgQU5wIjgABP 2Ne8lAvZP3Q5STI8inkwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUReuir/SSy4IxLVGLp6chnfNtyA8wDQYJKoZIhvcN AQELBQADggEBAE7UiSe5/R2Hd34PKAWQ8QovyTs+vZOckMav+pFRhzJUa+jKwXFRXJmOtfrgYhmZ pgeafBMn2+UCooQS2RX2CkRXxDSPbXMfOtagAT3e44LkRWuy6yX9gF4dOZC+W0L2zpFg4/mgVgxI EM4zaHvNk6vwastPWA+5e10bBIGepyLiV0kn7pKTCL5pCFMCOi5dyBn0UIBOAtmwXZG0k4f5lpaB VUCOZu2C2LsoX+1MYe0GWCgZUxFEvEcgKbIEbNiJVJk7ddtneCweknjGVT1YEhEybr1DDE0023vG QtvsvqubYUwGkuOO3yEqUFcEwGCiNdUknmY3CUnP1fhls+DibsIxggMpMIIDJQIBATB5MGUxCzAJ BgNVBAYTAlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5j b20xJDAiBgNVBAMTG0RpZ2lDZXJ0IFNIQTIgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBDQQIQBvN44l5anjz638FFBB+G ZzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFAKCCAYEwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0B CQUxDxcNMjAwMzExMjAzNjE5WjAvBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxIgQgBbindFoJVPiE7fnh2mT0x9Lst/kN UVyOFDEkVmj/6IIwgYgGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDF7MHkwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERp Z2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQg U0hBMiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBAhAG83jiXlqePPrfwUUEH4ZnMIGKBgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzF7oHkw ZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2lj ZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgU0hBMiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBAhAG83jiXlqePPrf wUUEH4ZnMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIBAEd1sr7sGFp0tFMGZKkyAfpkLf42uW9icQFWITQTOWgf znh2kB4QAH0LOI+WXgecNZsddUmlmSqaUjJl0hTEy2sadmCHHMgXYMJ+xz/gm/VXDYa1shoQRjpE O9p25OHGa58mjcy1V58G6lkSSXvgcMiLTMIPCkghTC8tIj8aYvHFHcEOBft93sexi/+31a+APVnE nwuA79D7wJrlhLOoDdFk3v48aeUkxmlzEf2jnkSwB/nITVpH7R9+fWfA9VHXza7Mi/PMoDRZY7L/ j294sVvF4NHyxKZgLi1ugQ5/UkPOpdI0ulKE6igmmvX06GFds7ADVLODmCrQa+ScMAMH1egAAAAA AAA= --Apple-Mail=_739725C1-3C32-47F3-936C-A5FBD6C31663-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 13:40:08 2020 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 26E733A0CB7; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:40:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 s5rQN_WVAmNo; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x544.google.com (mail-ed1-x544.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::544]) (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 468943A09CC; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x544.google.com with SMTP id a20so4612356edj.2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:39:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ySugw6f99OoUo1S+YSzfVibZYeRhwWHpOcuCNPiwxDw=; b=i3pZSfkqwl03Be7TP2lymtm1I1ckNIuea7TN3yZR7D+PX/E1kEnn219SWF8GaVrLwx guj8mexzA6tx1OAfKYhF3z7NRoSVT/ExS75V/rwDb03uBX3fdSFcLfefqNEdN5Xxah8T U5e6cdBxgE6Ga00CJ/gp6vaW6xIAHJHlJ4jaSh++/mgzcPzjchHDO8dNN054aEItiNOk C4dxtGgZybxeTguhdPoj1z1UoO/lwiVmE0KtqMwez24X1jCmAGp093XXKTHKpi+7Ez9d fJcTE5iiwzEXc8nH+/CKOxT4615JrSOzDLmfUhABAp42o8sx9lgwn9Bjf2ZWmUerdOd1 7kUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ySugw6f99OoUo1S+YSzfVibZYeRhwWHpOcuCNPiwxDw=; b=rixUuHo39OU9n6wSWshAf580GXEs+UvgBEufQRRWK7UJEMSy/xeggoUimfSiNmUhHP 8kp/iTaruRkt0qyZO04l5lf8KwRY08d/RYgEgDWW/KCl77tCpagcpK6lmMvzXuRTrlqD r7CpJia3zvko84mP2+7gyOaMesVS+XY7P9RlVAtqTllQUlub15eqsVZdfulJybgwK4kT WwxOOx1bVkv+CQ+IGKehR5s4TMWz2bo6Ct3uCUitwlQ8UNQ4t8Umz7HWpmqVBOttxvpr PFhU564sXrkW/QrEK2RKtDbayu7x0R9Opi7nrKlvGriajof/mUxFmVhWExGMCiwMknZF V0Og== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1q0M984mdvKVEU4M9Z39J3KnSxoyM9RkU+Mwiw4bmZDsZhI0IL 5Uv6+J8V5JOUeZpSYhuD+6kxXDLG4aFvPHWznbltb4gt X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsYUmbaDP47s1ipwSM3y+Va2ADLq9pZXvPOueUS2+eUM7LHP20XJqHKxXH6rAcXkBkXZalx2H1o6/ypeWay+RA= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:dc06:: with SMTP id b6mr4850745edu.336.1583959196761; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:39:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:39:56 -0700 From: Alvaro Retana In-Reply-To: <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:39:56 -0700 Message-ID: To: Brian E Carpenter , The IESG Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 20:40:02 -0000 On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: Brian: Hi! > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > DISCUSS: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this document = as a > > BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF commun= ity. > > > > The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: > > > > The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Standa= rds > > Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether work= ing > > groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their > > work will remain entirely at their discretion. > > > > However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working Grou= p > > Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it repres= ents > > consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision "to us= e > > GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their discretion= ." > > Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction help? It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having this document be part of BCP 25. ... > > IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this document > > belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be part= of > > BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to dis= cuss > > this topic. > > Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP number?) wa= s > typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with a bit o= f > discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community discussion,= of > course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). No, I don't think things have changed. =C2=A0In this case, the AD added a note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to BCP 25 at the time of publication." https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies directly to WG operation. =C2=A0The intention of adding documents to it should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. Thanks! Alvaro. From nobody Wed Mar 11 14:29:22 2020 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 7A55A3A0D69 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:29:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=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 H5GYrVXQJhE8 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22d.google.com (mail-lj1-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 9F10B3A0D66 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22d.google.com with SMTP id 19so4006036ljj.7 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:29:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0wHJYRr0QVtcrpA3FANpmt8WE7ET1mNSlDuYMC9i92w=; b=y4avENX9Biyiw16Oq862k4Fbp6C1lba+54XGY6P59r3ALu2Mpc41zc/L2jeD6tNg8j 2qn8MF+YCP+rUDLBtnktPUi4pnaYG2shi2Buml5svgn/I+duSQ5SNzi8giKhHhfnHbzQ Mbw/NeyI5i+dIJKFuR33/gkTj8XXMIdJ+PlU5P1poG/xElt5l2Tu53zRKiuQJAckoO1b jO9Ssy2ZP2b3KlbrVUOIjY+I1my0kwoMouHjsz9uQWSyv07X7Z1XKzfbFqKBbmq068SK db4jdbefoq+kGDb8ZPA3BI+prvDabhGPucgprdgUHzYiZldKSJKI5tP/DViduBSyj71K Ne+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0wHJYRr0QVtcrpA3FANpmt8WE7ET1mNSlDuYMC9i92w=; b=Ffwr6SR/NVpnyAHtjJh2O8/FTu+7P5oHdng4TBQo7KCsF++0MFbw12jOjrJNONOxht VWApMwl6dTpSOFNGyitgZ/eAp5DuN4jQjQs1y50kADJ+3tZh9PNyK1Ce3Q7xiuEw1ja6 7zksdXbPsq65CCsGZKJWjHmPkDpgsrtmP9x9KiNgwPX3IC9nWFsq1E+FLMeCw9H58uRG nDblLDrbsB+xdkd65StiRLJYceErAiEokAfMEAFvT3NjK1+UCgt8KhWIp3RaUtprmruK OyoM265w4RUapFFp8Wpf+QG3O7/m8qYEoxT1QOtcNcI/hBb0O+0yjZxox8ZYVfNxUU66 d/9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ37vgnh9jdt0Tvx18S1sSTD4toqgqwHO4AI9OkLGXwSbLG9qIkv 45B4eACaShuPrU5nclJo4rHIpkrl7oBecXKVEUYhtA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtp7qe9fMnTXiW4igC/A90iNqsWFYzFq74FG1LBsdVhlO35ACVG2/oSV2cg8avpDf4Wh4szPsp4830ZoQ7plVA= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7a0c:: with SMTP id v12mr995334ljc.274.1583962156601; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:29:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: From: Eric Rescorla Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 14:28:40 -0700 Message-ID: To: Warren Kumari Cc: "Salz, Rich" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Alissa Cooper , IESG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000aea5b205a09aedd4" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 21:29:21 -0000 --000000000000aea5b205a09aedd4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 12:59 PM Warren Kumari wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:41 PM Salz, Rich > wrote: > > > > > Personally I would rather see this document switch to informationa= l > and move forward with publication. I don=E2=80=99t think the label =E2=80= =9CBCP=E2=80=9D makes much > of a difference, the point is just to document practices to make it easie= r > for IETF WGs to get their work done. I would be curious what the WG think= s. > > > > We do think this is the best ways to do things, but if the BCP label ha= s > people tied up in knots, it's better to publish than delay and be right. = I > can live with informational. > > Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to be: > "This document describes best practices for Working Groups that choose > to use GitHub for their work." > and leave it as BCP. > I don't see a material difference here, so if this resolves your DISCUSS, let's do it. -Ekr Would that work better for everyone? It would be enough for me to no > longer feel that this is saying that WGs using GitHub is a BCP, but > rather that if a WG decided to use GitHub, this is the best way to do > so (I'm still not sure that this really is the best way, but that's > just my opinion, and I'm OK being in the rough) > > W > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > -- > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > idea in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > of pants. > ---maf > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > --000000000000aea5b205a09aedd4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 12:59 PM Warr= en Kumari <warren@kumari.net>= ; wrote:
On Wed,= Mar 11, 2020 at 3:41 PM Salz, Rich
<rsalz=3D40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Personally I would rather see this document switch t= o informational and move forward with publication. I don=E2=80=99t think th= e label =E2=80=9CBCP=E2=80=9D makes much of a difference, the point is just= to document practices to make it easier for IETF WGs to get their work don= e. I would be curious what the WG thinks.
>
> We do think this is the best ways to do things, but if the BCP label h= as people tied up in knots, it's better to publish than delay and be ri= ght.=C2=A0 I can live with informational.

Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to be:
"This document describes best practices for Working Groups that choose=
to use GitHub for their work."
and leave it as BCP.

I don't see a = material difference here, so if this resolves your DISCUSS, let's do it= .

-Ekr


Would that work better for everyone? It would be enough for me to no
longer feel that this is saying that WGs using GitHub is a BCP, but
rather that if a WG decided to use GitHub, this is the best way to do
so (I'm still not sure that this really is the best way, but that's=
just my opinion, and I'm OK being in the rough)

W



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



--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0---maf

_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-gith= ub@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-= github
--000000000000aea5b205a09aedd4-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 16:03:36 2020 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 8061D3A09A6 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:03:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=UVb3iBsQ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=ky9vSqxI 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 7ijB3TJvWcZo for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4292D3A09D1 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CA5C21C24 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:03:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:03:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=R6RkA 10CiHIT4C6XFNZvoNglzJjyxSepzkGyY573oNo=; b=UVb3iBsQD4YM2eh2byArR 458qe9cbhHIANIBdmVKVSzfTJOiqH4HFT6wvlVltgBl/jMtZcJHI60iy1cis8G// vhvXHwTlItichUfO70O3bzRnKSxNcKbdMp+ekSB51w/LkULX1jPv425NYT7wRbRU U9YjNQZRv4cdNhtMFqHVBboXci0tj/tcE4QoQxJL6ne0G5rwr+Q9DxbbfFLHSw7A Rp7H4GuPH9dODlARV1Kg+447yLCz4OUIExQr2f5QdY7OWK/Tkt5N0Xe/sJ9PrJBU 138OuZN/cuuTuh4Jn7GhvhjekwmGVQKQuAo5XvGr2X5H9Pq+zx+zvOVJVI7ot0/x A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=R6RkA10CiHIT4C6XFNZvoNglzJjyxSepzkGyY573o No=; b=ky9vSqxI4pJb8/L/NEEj1wLTFBvhpd9r4ioToZPqdO0cfe7JoseIq3KSu NbrtWC8/7Jq7uXgQs+i2hxeuBSfvrOs4wlrpruDXZxDnHag8/R89A27YcONEZzNu Hh0Ga7AC1+ttbHWA+J6oEKvku8r4hRm8T20tolz4BbI1RECzSjhH3st6HLQu4VG8 UnEWDOaupovmHRywt0GSt7+hJ14qLaoV5rLTyDp8X1pFVlpJ5wHlq7UunpRaSZdH VCmXXG9DHSx2F29081UWas6vGwcQDmgAZ1KVYhYU0Hg0OgqI09mvRKwJjqHrAIug vcmtdzL6IMZjQyv8gn5nWiQXGUm/Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedgudekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtgfesth hqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehl ohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrg hmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id E52B4E00B2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:03:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <27fd774b-b8cd-4454-81d2-36c44d497574@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:03:05 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Warren_Kumari=27s_Discuss_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 23:03:35 -0000 On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 06:41, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Personally I would rather see this document switch to information= al and move forward with publication. I don=E2=80=99t think the label =E2= =80=9CBCP=E2=80=9D makes much of a difference, the point is just to docu= ment practices to make it easier for IETF WGs to get their work done. I = would be curious what the WG thinks.=20 > =20 > We do think this is the best ways to do things, but if the BCP label=20= > has people tied up in knots, it's better to publish than delay and be=20= > right. I can live with informational. What I value is getting consensus on some best practices, that I hope wi= ll eventually become common. An informational document achieves that go= al as effectively as a BCP. Hell, if it weren't for the fact that publication as RFC is a codificati= on of community consensus, this entire process would have been unnecessa= ry. I could have just done more presentations to WG chairs. But I valu= e that consensus. Which is why I'm taking the time to deal with objecti= ons of the sort that Warren raises. From nobody Wed Mar 11 16:06:20 2020 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 39EA03A0928 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:06:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=rOSmN2kv; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=h6XIZJPD 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 S1nJU2Vna_Vz for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10C7E3A0927 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C88D21FA7 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:06:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:06:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=A3VIUOC+/Zt7G3xikjIJFEbrwF1DIwu gEiutvNxX/jA=; b=rOSmN2kvdShhZgG5NRP0SUNplmxQSa1QxlihmHw3EHolsLS 1BRreE1QwPBLR8Clvkuycb0EAa7/ou2yY2dNG79w619W3sekCTbtLgBocG3BBuod BwV5QhgIHboCT3wW3AZnJ0kQK4HkzEyDvifhvu26DXtC8l7//bPolTvgSPMlKvZ1 E/a4nEYRwbah2c3FmDe65/k3iAR69SSbnbZ0rzjPgXPqfRJTMQamzjGkjp+Zpi4F 1OqzE7GX685XqRsSlEcSkXZp2Qiiz7b9XRLxxdzXS0Siw6xnLfVk8Dom7VV70pCo MwyMBE7sITP4RaqnUq8Ix8i6NAGypnei5Xm+q7w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=A3VIUO C+/Zt7G3xikjIJFEbrwF1DIwugEiutvNxX/jA=; b=h6XIZJPDfu0sSACae2AqeF R9bbiXqEZ83CRSkewL+vRQwGm6UrDvuY4t1MRjTfBFtFOWPdZDtHvuT70YnCQJOe +iAPp0SOq2Oc+feg+lVtps4Nd0sfIrpm+l5ZKNsK39R9YZ7exgXdaYrEwic14rw7 ZU5zrgKNyW2SgWBRFuuXsBTMDQl1YrCAhhg8M/YPVQ91gmO2pZoRFyS+tHbrSTd2 bAlKsbQNNsz6dmzIRhTsaaesAOBaSDFb5xkgJGLlgVkPuQAnk6GUYKhl9rfNyEk4 yRfw7EoZToBgpOiwAvLfecvoS9zkMsFAD7xywefs6Xk+tm/uFdRK+z4kFArWPfgw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedgudekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttd ertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgrrhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhho figvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecuve hluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2C070E00B2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:06:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:05:56 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Warren_Kumari=27s_Discuss_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 23:06:19 -0000 On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 06:58, Warren Kumari wrote: > Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to be: > "This document describes best practices for Working Groups that choose > to use GitHub for their work." > and leave it as BCP. I should read all the thread before replying... https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46 makes this change. From nobody Wed Mar 11 16:17:44 2020 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 605C03A09EF; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:17:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=S528HfPC; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=pAgONOsm 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 b0bqrvW8AwN4; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:17:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B98C3A077C; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 16:17:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60B9B21FAE; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:17:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:17:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=UI Et2mbnYp/HQz46rfrhgBqJGqq6m3fx+phqad4oW94=; b=S528HfPC+9xLXbD21e L1tQKi9EMoEvVMfmNKIAoGpUjj+IuMlpWDfihML7YpNbE+S0Vb/VLNYbAeck13f6 FEcICvSVIVxbYHVarClhtM067cqVKtj2gf6l7i4YGdzZFChvOJrj6eimUH8kFqx4 hstNGGV+7/bbL1tkVgXRXxMOmqRhdL6boCafqM1t7ZVLzrVy3CyT7e8F1KKRcLEP Bo9OmZRVxKR2hUcPA8ATst8pcjDyVmHgAg5EdCZizNayykrlgpqSqJ2li5W7358p rSsvX78o0W43vC7Kb22bTK4QDRqqv/xxnqOUxidd8G1ZKMTigug6IOAcgDz1Bq0Q vGVw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=UIEt2mbnYp/HQz46rfrhgBqJGqq6m3fx+phqad4oW 94=; b=pAgONOsmC5sIiMv8yi9FVkn5iWs4gi+IMm5EuojR2ilYMaSBkLnrL5ecc LspC5Hqis0X5QEH23EHIFD+QHi1wBDT8X3WdfLNlL811CRK9p+F6MY/31LRz5mYk pOpKhsvwq/mQGZmyQGDWT0WRj/l7FJO63OFU6SYd1OrC7PQRa17cI0HeiI8EVN45 U5hJil77eAU0uJfrwcrmy+x1fllRS+TGREcuN0CCbElZvPwqRzwVRjXLIkiw86l7 L+gjtFoonf3AQgk0mfhPkeTadcOxCGaYt6je03FJiL8YgfjtMdzmhyAeGfKs5mc0 YHjnqaMtb++qhhJjwPGiI9Am1Cz0g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedgudelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfr rghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id D2DF6E00B2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:17:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:17:04 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Alvaro Retana" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Alvaro_Retana=27s_Discuss_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 11 Mar 2020 23:17:35 -0000 Hi Alvaro, Thanks for the feedback. I think that we'll pursue the DISCUSS thing se= parately. I want to (attempt to) discharge your comments. I have prepared a pull request that you can review here: https://github.= com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/47 I appreciate that you didn't repeat comments from others, but in case yo= u care, there is a collection of changes proposed as a result of other r= eviews: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pulls On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 05:53, Alvaro Retana via Datatracker wrote: > (2) It would be nice to have a short terminology section; I assume man= y people > reading this document will not already be GitHub-savy, so push, pull, = commits, > may not be familiar to them. Alternatively, an Informational pointer = to a > tutorial would also be ok. I've added a reference to the GitHub glossary that covers both git and G= itHub terminology in some detail. =20 > (3) Personally, I don't have an issue with the use of GitHub, but some= of the > statements in the Introduction sound like marketing blurbs, for exampl= e: >=20 > - "Use of this service has been found to reduce the time that Working = Groups > need to produce documents and to improve the quality of the final r= esult." >=20 > - "...encourage contributions from a larger set of contributors." >=20 > - "Using GitHub can also broaden the community of contributors for a > specification." That's a fair observation, yes. > (5) [major] =C2=A75.3: "Working Group chairs SHOULD confirm that the = Working Group > has consensus to adopt any process." When would the chairs not confir= m > consensus to adopt a process? IOW, why is this not a MUST? >=20 > Note that =C2=A73 says this: >=20 > Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining how to best > accomplish the charter objectives in an open and transparent fashio= n. > The Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining if there i= s > interest in using GitHub and making a consensus call to determine i= f > the proposed policy and use is acceptable. >=20 > Even though this text doesn't use rfc2119 keywords, my impression of t= he intent > is that it is required for the chairs to make the consensus call. IOW= , I think > that this text and the one above (from =C2=A75.3) are in conflict. I'm going to remove the keywords here. Because this is a specialization= of language from RFC 2418 and while the specialization is useful, the u= se of 2119 keywords isn't consistent with the original: The Chair has the responsibility and the authority to make decisions, on behalf of the working group, regarding all matters of working group process and staffing, in conformance with the rules of the IETF. =20 > (6) =C2=A75.3.2: >=20 > Gaining Working Group consensus about the resolution of issues can = be > done in the abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the > outcome of discussions as they see fit. >=20 > This sentence doesn't sound right to me: "consensus...can be done in t= he > abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the outcome...as the= y see > fit". That last part doesn't sound right: Chairs call consensus. May= be I'm > misinterpreting... Others have had trouble with this. Perhaps rephrasing is in order. How= does this sound? > Chairs are able to declare Working Group consensus about the resolutio= n of issues in the abstract, allowing editors discretion on how to captu= re the decisions in documents. > (7) [major]. Why is draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration listed as a= > Normative Reference? I don't think that dependency is needed. I will adjust. There is no normative dependency. Thanks for noticing. From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:23:18 2020 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 C40523A09B8; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:23:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=mnot.net header.b=DONOGMT8; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=AcVyvtoD 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 gUrs3uJVdgB1; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:23:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A60FF3A098B; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:23:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0723988; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:23:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:23:14 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=q zC4cEgbE7uzJz1TZsC7dAeA/G4CB+A++KZKXIfqUsA=; b=DONOGMT8QaPJK8hgb /uOMPzks8pjO72JLCov8hepOu9upqPGAwnFWwGSbAC+nrbaBIv0SSSfjcJar9PqD b5mmP2JHgLprF7iSVH1ohvLFiAynsvzIkf3r4WCiWgeNRvO/beN8eYuMfShQTYL0 yGOsaEmNW09GiAUF6RRoLbDWQhyQ7wSGiq17r+5ZB4n3oo5zS0wkid1PfxAcg1Tg 7rqayk2lTCf/YJ+nJwpxKfauHzw7NO+wCYz5BV0hoJZX+2YTvQAmUOoEY5fqUmNf 5uWqCBJYE6x2uQ9/v2X/UOohy1axHyNnNqYrRKVhLk+Y2xuvYXU/pzfJ+I3tc7sZ 2oL8g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=qzC4cEgbE7uzJz1TZsC7dAeA/G4CB+A++KZKXIfqU sA=; b=AcVyvtoDc4ZLmkMV220pJ+1mJyB8oxg6sSd85GpSbrJyuBqJw5prIkj/6 ZPpqn7p/mc9gyfBZSookafH2JyJJj89kXQecz96crrSt2Yz1tbPWunubUvT3z77w /t4GLqDelge6DdvqVjfdET+wp6pEum1M/KwhAPcLz7sext9hqCMo9RdspJXYTtbc VIUhv2VAjYZJxSaEytwpOm4isHEQvCMWpVRPqplF/v6W+XJWYqleZEj6BCoG6FYC 3pcHvrNo9/ohre5id8rFjaaOj2AsMK9qBtPRDZtqCXhacg7WTD5plpdQuwOLeuIW 8I8kfYsY5Wg3ifpQrgYL8F1jTbQIw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedgfeefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtvdenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhk ucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinh epghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhivghtfhdrohhrghdpmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppedu udelrddujedrudehkedrvdehudenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmh epmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4513B30614B1; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:23:05 +1100 Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> To: Martin Thomson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:23:17 -0000 > On 12 Mar 2020, at 10:05 am, Martin Thomson wrote: >=20 > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 06:58, Warren Kumari wrote: >> Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to be: >> "This document describes best practices for Working Groups that = choose >> to use GitHub for their work." >> and leave it as BCP. >=20 > I should read all the thread before replying... >=20 > https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46 makes this change. I have some sympathy for Warren's concerns (regardless of the process = intricacies). I didn't review this document closely in LC because my recollection when = we started the group, there were numerous reassurances that it was = advisory only, not requiring things from groups that didn't want to opt = into these processes. The charter seems to support this view (note "that = choose to adopt the *practices*", not "Github"): """ The GitHub Integration and Tooling (GIT) working group will select a set = of such practices and document policies that support those practices. = The policies will each detail how work is conducted by working groups = that opt to follow the work practice. The goal is to provide both = process and tooling support for working groups that choose to adopt the = practices. ... Whether working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies = to support their work will remain entirely at their discretion. """ So this change doesn't go far enough; it needs to say something like: > This document describes a set of practices that Working Groups using = GitHub can choose to adopt. Changing the document to Informational would also make me feel _much_ = better about it. With apologies for the late feedback, a few more notes FWIW: * "Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for = anything more than managing drafts." This seems onerous; does it mean = that I need to consult with the AD to host some tests (e.g., = ), a repository for a = wiki (e.g., ), working group = administrivia (), or a = translation ()? * "Maintaining multiple documents in the same repository can add = overhead that negatively affects individual documents. For instance, = issues might require additional markings to identify the document that = they affect. Also, because editors all have write access to the = repository, managing the set of people with write access to a larger = repository is more difficult (Section 3.3)." This is well-worn = territory, but there are also costs associated with having many = repositories -- both in terms of WG chair load, and in terms of = potential errors (as we're discovering in QUIC). * "Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group = consensus MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented." = This seems to be pre-emptively establishing both the status of Github = issues in the IETF process, and the semantics of their state.=20 * "Editors SHOULD create a new Internet-Draft submission two weeks prior = to every session..." How is this requirement specific to Github? * Generally, there are a lot of RFC2119 terms that seem advisory, not = normative. Are they all well-considered? To give one example: "Editors = SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather than = committing directly to the "master" branch of the repository." What does = it mean to violate that SHOULD? Cheers, >=20 >=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 Mar 11 17:28:16 2020 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 A998A3A0E4C for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:28:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=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 nHD63nbKBsGa for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:28:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) (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 730463A0E33 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:28:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id c20so3313463lfb.0 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:28:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=AHOai9ncVNHuDiO30+W31OGsoFZizpq3j1puonz4JMQ=; b=O2s0ebHvyDbxVujVaxbhCTwUrn2ZJ/m/1T6N+7XIFfKRgKesh39q6KL4cugKHDiOur oROYs8XH6mKp4TdnMl+QiTIfDJW+uAEGktPL93s2So5fFTghnMkucvfjPdxO3DeXjhKP vE1HLwS6aTniu8dLwTM6HuspojsJJZyP+Gv2c3xfBYJkl5xB+dlQHieoMoDSGK4xGoRR l2a7q6g/i6Us0jsQSU/OfxHi58PYqjIGWujQsNtYkbJycSwx6jk61rTnCxdGHPa3q7xz 8ikAaQ0Uwd8FNgE2g15I0GIdaBRUm3bKfwdyIw88OHn6+x6TBbJsSucQdG8lu4GmuVB5 epDA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AHOai9ncVNHuDiO30+W31OGsoFZizpq3j1puonz4JMQ=; b=dFeFhZ1iTHAyLodFVAj9U8K9B1k0atCdFadL6DZ8gcEDi4Yj20kaej5zawd7GT0kQc We6crtsvzvts8ApO1smOgdR7K0VZdLmevbjUeTTyFh6rajQTV59XKXgKxmT8I1HOa6NZ m8ZLcE+K9gHGrv6IrXJ2PGKe53Rl9YaznOZBqWJRRwJ/Bg9KQUFPWKs17HGQxwawAFJ3 K3bk6ga8Ie31K9CV4lI9BBmjpAOFgH/dxut0H+pUrs8N9LGDmR+JCZiwECQPI253BLFM cITCdg7N//SY9rOPe/6wFGAE4DG+9xZuunHdMTSDgpYuySXSf6/RD/00/BGOQI/1Cd4X Y9kw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2LOwa7J4iYO407O0q3frxZh2Q0g5tKEVALF1JqKqgo3wfakTIM x61wHHgItMlV7DOyxpULj0q/3lzkieuaxjx9ELlWSQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vv4khf8+mK4DlxmfPMGn8Z4VvP5jzP4cozj1G0d1286MJlynexuYfg/+812WMN/iZWUHkH6QffQCL4w8c8krHI= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:55b7:: with SMTP id y23mr3452449lfg.140.1583972889574; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:28:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:27:33 -0700 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Cc: Martin Thomson , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006b051305a09d6dfc" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:28:14 -0000 --0000000000006b051305a09d6dfc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:23 PM Mark Nottingham wrote: > > On 12 Mar 2020, at 10:05 am, Martin Thomson wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 06:58, Warren Kumari wrote: > >> Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to be: > >> "This document describes best practices for Working Groups that choose > >> to use GitHub for their work." > >> and leave it as BCP. > > > > I should read all the thread before replying... > > > > https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46 makes this change. > > I have some sympathy for Warren's concerns (regardless of the process > intricacies). > > I didn't review this document closely in LC because my recollection when > we started the group, there were numerous reassurances that it was advisory > only, not requiring things from groups that didn't want to opt into these > processes. The charter seems to support this view (note "that choose to > adopt the *practices*", not "Github"): > > """ > The GitHub Integration and Tooling (GIT) working group will select a set > of such practices and document policies that support those practices. The > policies will each detail how work is conducted by working groups that opt > to follow the work practice. The goal is to provide both process and > tooling support for working groups that choose to adopt the practices. > > .... > > Whether working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to > support their work will remain entirely at their discretion. > """ > > So this change doesn't go far enough; it needs to say something like: > > > This document describes a set of practices that Working Groups using > GitHub can choose to adopt. > > Changing the document to Informational would also make me feel _much_ > better about it. > I agree with Martin here: the point of having this go through a WG and consensus is that we think that if you are using Github this is a good set of practices and that we recommend them in that case. So while it's at their discretion that doesn't mean we don't have an opinion. -Ekr > With apologies for the late feedback, a few more notes FWIW: > > * "Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for > anything more than managing drafts." This seems onerous; does it mean that > I need to consult with the AD to host some tests (e.g., < > https://github.com/httpwg/structured-header-tests>), a repository for a > wiki (e.g., ), working group > administrivia (), or a > translation ()? > > * "Maintaining multiple documents in the same repository can add overhead > that negatively affects individual documents. For instance, issues might > require additional markings to identify the document that they affect. > Also, because editors all have write access to the repository, managing the > set of people with write access to a larger repository is more difficult > (Section 3.3)." This is well-worn territory, but there are also costs > associated with having many repositories -- both in terms of WG chair load, > and in terms of potential errors (as we're discovering in QUIC). > > * "Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consensus > MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented." This seems to > be pre-emptively establishing both the status of Github issues in the IETF > process, and the semantics of their state. > > * "Editors SHOULD create a new Internet-Draft submission two weeks prior > to every session..." How is this requirement specific to Github? > > * Generally, there are a lot of RFC2119 terms that seem advisory, not > normative. Are they all well-considered? To give one example: "Editors > SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather than > committing directly to the "master" branch of the repository." What does it > mean to violate that SHOULD? > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > --0000000000006b051305a09d6dfc Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:23 PM Mark = Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote= :
> On 12 Mar= 2020, at 10:05 am, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 06:58, Warren Kumari wrote:
>> Thank you -- I would even be OK with just changing to Abstract to = be:
>> "This document describes best practices for Working Groups th= at choose
>> to use GitHub for their work."
>> and leave it as BCP.
>
> I should read all the thread before replying...
>
> https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pu= ll/46 makes this change.

I have some sympathy for Warren's concerns (regardless of the process i= ntricacies).

I didn't review this document closely in LC because my recollection whe= n we started the group, there were numerous reassurances that it was adviso= ry only, not requiring things from groups that didn't want to opt into = these processes. The charter seems to support this view (note "that ch= oose to adopt the *practices*", not "Github"):

"""
The GitHub Integration and Tooling (GIT) working group will select a set of= such practices and document policies that support those practices. The pol= icies will each detail how work is conducted by working groups that opt to = follow the work practice. The goal is to provide both process and tooling s= upport for working groups that choose to adopt the practices.

....

Whether working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to s= upport their work will remain entirely at their discretion.
"""

So this change doesn't go far enough; it needs to say something like:
>=C2=A0 This document describes a set of practices that Working Groups u= sing GitHub can choose to adopt.

Changing the document to Informational would also make me feel _much_ bette= r about it.

I agree with Martin here: t= he point of having this go through a WG and consensus is that we think that= if you are using Github this is a good set of practices and that we recomm= end them in that case. So while it's at their discretion that doesn'= ;t mean we don't have an opinion.

-Ekr


With apologies for the late feedback, a few more notes FWIW:

* "Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub fo= r anything more than managing drafts."=C2=A0 This seems onerous; does = it mean that I need to consult with the AD to host some tests (e.g., <https://github.com/httpwg/structured-header-tests= >), a repository for a wiki (e.g., <https://github.com/http= wg/wiki/wiki>), working group administrivia (<https:= //github.com/quicwg/wg-materials>), or a translation (<https://github.com/quicwg/zh-translations>)?

* "Maintaining multiple documents in the same repository can add overh= ead that negatively affects individual documents.=C2=A0 For instance, issue= s might require additional markings to identify the document that they affe= ct.=C2=A0 Also, because editors all have write access to the repository, ma= naging the set of people with write access to a larger repository is more d= ifficult (Section 3.3)."=C2=A0 This is well-worn territory, but there = are also costs associated with having many repositories -- both in terms of= WG chair load, and in terms of potential errors (as we're discovering = in QUIC).

* "Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group consen= sus MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented."=C2=A0 T= his seems to be pre-emptively establishing both the status of Github issues= in the IETF process, and the semantics of their state.

* "Editors SHOULD create a new Internet-Draft submission two weeks pri= or to every session..."=C2=A0 How is this requirement specific to Gith= ub?

* Generally, there are a lot of RFC2119 terms that seem advisory, not norma= tive. Are they all well-considered? To give one example: "Editors SHOU= LD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather than committing di= rectly to the "master" branch of the repository." What does = it mean to violate that SHOULD?

Cheers,


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

--
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
--0000000000006b051305a09d6dfc-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:33:17 2020 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 4EAC03A0977; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:33:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Warren Kumari via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Warren Kumari Message-ID: <158397319008.19691.1863011759618135622@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:33:10 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Abstain on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:33:11 -0000 Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Abstain When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I still don't love this, but I changed from DISCUSS to Abstain - https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46 , https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-and-github/vnXiskU2VGIx8VenEP34GWGfOwM/ I recognize that my opinion does not trump WG / IETF consensus, so I'm holding my nose on this one. While I'm on this soapbox, I'd like to thank the authors for listening to, and trying to address my concerns. I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for working groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: "Whether working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document does let WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" way. I happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and use that to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing our working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at it can be turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" paradigm for a reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be entirely their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wrong - and a BCP does that... The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it." but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: "Working Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being managed on Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has always been clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't change it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes more places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place where is is really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the argument that it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *opinion* the right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHub" applies to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels very close to the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with a Bic pen when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of gitea, gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives one tool prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when people happen to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue tracker to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal convenience -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions get made in the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this will end up with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker, and those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions made. 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides to fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or implicitly) disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one when a document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues between repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can't transfer an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they have to be (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state (I may also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that talks about migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version, and what should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at www.github.com/wkumari/ to www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administrative annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could see. I think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that moving the repo entails. Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: maintain a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub - but I really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the "one true way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:40:13 2020 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 133403A099F; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:39:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=mnot.net header.b=mVlmSyQI; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=EKCGGA4Z 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 lJ_7K6IIA2LO; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 749FA3A0E95; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:39:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C66B9BC; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:39:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:39:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=v IqTLJudJDLHr79H4wsqjGqq4f9tZVm9vRNu7X0WUxA=; b=mVlmSyQIQLRfWdQE/ 3P1FCs2OnjAJEA9kp6HPiOZrkGhjC4va4XOozNVb8pXnLlXdBQpDgjDCJgb7j7F+ M8wEo0rPnqS6ErWaUlQXUspVWTBqbc7lDFG+3eg3nEcxriUX/Ew1f08iCn/koVi9 2Yrolj6eobRye6ffgJJKno5r+W2tevEewoYZdJ7d5fqM1RcyP01o0N4qduLknL63 Zl1MDDnf2Olie+dws3aOionuAxTj27XJM2GRS9CNb2Fg6F2+WJnewMx/SG2QwtIP Zp6cqu3IfNbWhj1HWmtrYgwEhtlYPtXRyq1nyNFB39A27FHwFSjQm65fobMkszj2 Lufhw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=vIqTLJudJDLHr79H4wsqjGqq4f9tZVm9vRNu7X0WU xA=; b=EKCGGA4Z4HdF9ZTsjMyfWrOw/5VFN4I+44Di2M+GnkbBtJRoqVZyPQQ/g yrIdPoEuMAZ5gIQaf9KjtcNn8WA31bvEWvfyyBE2tZ0OX4cLb67vjZ602axZCAyD OJ0rvgdbKvsIHlow3C5g8KGW2yeaN4uvgITA4k4V4JQcpKwpdwJfyBgqyXlaqVwb I8Wo6MWwRldOdLeY8Zz56UbiC/OisLVNSDWLEtMNv2VILvif5TqXpyYUgCTHPXLz OW/Rm9vWFwYRQmlc8GjNo2I4utNX/OoAva/aYfNqYxysW46OMC7nrp99uSFg/laH RxGjYEjN89FgYv4wfsVaAYNX7ZVeQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedgfeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtvdenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhk ucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinh epmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppeduudelrddujedrudehkedrvdehudenucevlhhushht vghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrd hnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8092C3061363; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:39:45 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:39:42 +1100 Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG , Martin Thomson Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <345ECA39-073C-4DFB-8D5D-8419B297ACFC@mnot.net> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> To: Eric Rescorla X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:39:55 -0000 > On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:27 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: >=20 > I agree with Martin here: the point of having this go through a WG and = consensus is that we think that if you are using Github this is a good = set of practices and that we recommend them in that case. So while it's = at their discretion that doesn't mean we don't have an opinion. Sure. But the document doesn't say it's at their discretion; it says = that it's Best Current Practice for any WG that uses GitHub, and asserts = a lot of MUSTs about them. The charter language is very specific for a = reason; this was discussed in depth, and there were multiple assurances = that WGs would "opt in" to this document.=20 -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:44:47 2020 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 26E803A0EAC; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:44:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=MgRmnAlm; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=nhQnMBof 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 pFYslHcmEuzI; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C34C3A0EA0; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E095F2211C; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:44:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:44:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=dQSXUEApeyY2lCU38mfIEIW26HAx Ttc2yxHBDJam0zg=; b=MgRmnAlmppVJcoW30DMyE7vjYP+d6LwKiATdk/lSJ8O/ bcWij2v1ExrCgYl+zgmshx+FiUvg84PKVSCFhGBeATtFQTPIVYOcAyjiLgLY8pLb RpJv1j0NjR0NKCiTitJ0hvj+qVEX3zNLx9l+EdFQ0E+3hjyYONjE+TiO8+kEGkrA DZbaNc/3Otp94w8MnCaVKFNn3gfxVFwnoQIYkckY0QhniWZDR4CvdFDRrOsk+LJL BgBoTkNbtF+sOrm+LS7rKzpDubgBh7SnwRTLfyZnpzf/LAwGj+2vaZu7L5r8p+c8 dov7HRP6Kz0SSdkq3YZMU5okrxkZi8V4KXzGn5bVQQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=dQSXUE ApeyY2lCU38mfIEIW26HAxTtc2yxHBDJam0zg=; b=nhQnMBofNQTqBl99Ms/9b/ Vqbws+7KmpVUJtdZk+94AJcP2Q2GazP+unUocIPSBknwYAWJUpbt9avSzLkNTXQX WALXN201teERDCBzVaU1rN6cGNRvL92FqnMgUF94KixxmRLGuVBUpWNkDxsrC9l8 uZxuFc/Kq/b3ehAAt1TfWENeJYsr7HBm0ERlW2U2RZnUZcnD3xjLk53nmPU6uvDr x9+vopi7S29yJmZDUsVmRR3Ty6wiI5Q55ZQ9Bs7uwAbXzZfjMP5+vpYdxxFE1+vE ADGEeScL1Vg1ShAEkv/YvhvXnAr1lZneikPDje3YHgP4vfQl2Fqw3eodALSQ4o4A == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedgfeekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 430D2E00B2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:44:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:44:19 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Mark Nottingham" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "The IESG" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Warren_Kumari=27s_Discuss_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:44:41 -0000 Hi Mark, Any input, even late input, is better than nothing. I appreciate you spending the time. On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 11:23, Mark Nottingham wrote: > * "Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for > anything more than managing drafts." This seems onerous; does it mean > that I need to consult with the AD to host some tests (e.g., > ), a repository for > a wiki (e.g., ), working group > administrivia (), or a > translation ()? Yes, this was not considered in the original drafting. There is a proposed revision in https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/commit/e74ba457de2f0843a42c1214bec0033f559f187a > * "Maintaining multiple documents in the same repository can add > overhead that negatively affects individual documents. For instance, > issues might require additional markings to identify the document that > they affect. Also, because editors all have write access to the > repository, managing the set of people with write access to a larger > repository is more difficult (Section 3.3)." This is well-worn > territory, but there are also costs associated with having many > repositories -- both in terms of WG chair load, and in terms of > potential errors (as we're discovering in QUIC). I believe that encouraging the use of separate repos is the consensus outcome of working group discussions. You were involved. Suggestions for different wordings are always welcome, of course. > * "Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group > consensus MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented." > This seems to be pre-emptively establishing both the status of Github > issues in the IETF process, and the semantics of their state. There is a proposed revision in https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/commit/b872e534db4c885cd3cbfaac64fff7d06d41c5d4 (though Chris later improved the text further, see the PR: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 for more) > * "Editors SHOULD create a new Internet-Draft submission two weeks > prior to every session..." How is this requirement specific to Github? It's a poor restatement of the (lowercase) recommendation that was cited. I have reworded here: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/48 > * Generally, there are a lot of RFC2119 terms that seem advisory, not > normative. Are they all well-considered? To give one example: "Editors > SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather than > committing directly to the "master" branch of the repository." What > does it mean to violate that SHOULD? A lot of these have been removed in response to reviews. Including that example in response to Mirja's review: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/45 From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:48:44 2020 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 71E8B3A0EC3; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:48:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Adam Roach via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Adam Roach Message-ID: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:48:42 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:48:43 -0000 Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the work that went into this document. While I don't feel very strongly about it, I tend to agree with the voices arguing for recharacterizing this document as Informational. I will leave it to the sponsoring AD to handle this issue as she sees fit. Section 1.2: GitHub is a service operated at https://github.com/ (https://github.com/). The parenthetical seems unnecessary. GitHub is freely accessible on the open Internet, albeit currently only via IPv4. One sincerely hopes that this second clause will age badly. Perhaps qualify it with “at the time this document is published.” Alternately, remove the clause, as it adds virtually nothing to the document. Section 1.5: The words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", and "MAY" are used in this document. It's not shouting; when they are capitalized, they have the special meaning defined in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174]. Please use the boilerplate from RFC 8174. Section 3.2: Repositories for private documents MAY be kept private, but only where there is a specific reason for doing so. This seems really odd, completely undetectable/unenforceable, and actually harmful. It is common practice for editors to just keep their source local and only submit the output of such source to the i-d repository; and that’s just fine. This seems to say that such users are effectively forbidden to have their source equally private but also effectively backed-up and revision-controlled by one specific online service. It seems strictly better to allow and even encourage this, to prevent a loss of data. From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:48:57 2020 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 772803A0EC6 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:48:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 65ADcejBTl2T for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) (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 9EDB53A0EC0 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:48:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id q9so3295051lfc.10 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:48:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=J1+ZrxF6BZpO91Flixz5UN0I9qUpxPzz86WnxhLfzPk=; b=cMR57Kpi1g/s8FlJdG5f+mX6fuR5wNkr2ROMubt+0nuq/J6nv9zbUxa9cMVCTbyiCj cnbiUxpey25StkMO2xImeXeN+Dn1l7/K68TpfA/gFRikxRLrV4hmt8IQfARQ5r47LbSs ltntJbnsUynxZPoIMUmuAHK0Jm/82yC4Q+W9zxQ4pGHZprzhKAvrr5KWFqvvPqVs3d59 Ve7juvUmN4AZ2e2WiCVgCWZuHx1DQNezH/obpoK20my/xZcNe4nNT68vIE1t0OZGhBQt DekgUwN9N4je4wCQ8n2V8LK3rXR1YiZhumydPPygkKD1+/Gz41ix51NjjSpRy/pXeNUr FuSg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=J1+ZrxF6BZpO91Flixz5UN0I9qUpxPzz86WnxhLfzPk=; b=iNfNGwGSYTpTW67tl7hierAKAqKXIuxsnpoT3vZznXgnyWwLHkZGsnt0lNi+S8VqxZ 3QQpUiwD87EK/A0rLu/yf151qbPE79P7cGM7m2aZtmp9r8VmuB93eTWuMeErXkROiuov 4ihtT+MMSSQSyUfz7R8+NytCp3aYECkbOf6gah/Qzqji3HsAPyfonxadYFFE0A2WbyBC 3lDyKH24iqd9YmQt/zEVZOCFDlKS2yJcdx62qMubWkYCi0Sj9Wcoow4fY/SAFn5520aC sLRgGYS2l9g+o0B6nSr3cLwYORqOA35Xy9MBJqkIg3c6Vu/TZmK9EOv/6zBmwPas3D0+ g+Hg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2fgsNq4MDvTydbbVEa4sHfNv7QbDJJzC+GLH5zYEa9C122Usp4 RlE6yxk1aOYPX1SbiDZ7o3CdL1ta5dgYqT9KL3teUA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsjqy7VPZ/5eTWenSJe4A3WiWJfBKi6UQXUrwiU3oVWMt9wtd9dgnBjD2/P2WYpfy5cn2c/LGKGkdhboVEnpS8= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5e37:: with SMTP id o23mr3570678lfg.201.1583974119862; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:48:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> <345ECA39-073C-4DFB-8D5D-8419B297ACFC@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <345ECA39-073C-4DFB-8D5D-8419B297ACFC@mnot.net> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:48:03 -0700 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG , Martin Thomson Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bf879e05a09db679" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:48:44 -0000 --000000000000bf879e05a09db679 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:39 PM Mark Nottingham wrote: > > > > On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:27 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > I agree with Martin here: the point of having this go through a WG and > consensus is that we think that if you are using Github this is a good set > of practices and that we recommend them in that case. So while it's at > their discretion that doesn't mean we don't have an opinion. > > Sure. But the document doesn't say it's at their discretion; it says that > it's Best Current Practice for any WG that uses GitHub, and asserts a lot > of MUSTs about them. The charter language is very specific for a reason; > this was discussed in depth, and there were multiple assurances that WGs > would "opt in" to this document. > You seem to be complaining about two separate things: 1. That it says it's Best Current Practice 2. That it's not sufficiently clear it's optional. I think that (2) is implicit in the following text: The main purpose of this document is providing guidelines for how Working Groups might integrate the capabilities provided by GitHub into their processes for developing Internet-Drafts. However, I wouldn't object to making it clearer. Perhaps: "The choice of whether to use Github or whether to adopt these practices if they do is at the discretion of the WG". However, I would be sad to see us back off the claim that it's best current practice, because, as I said, that's the point of having a WG. -Ekr > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > --000000000000bf879e05a09db679 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:39 PM Mark = Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote= :


> On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:27 am, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
> I agree with Martin here: the point of having this go through a WG and= consensus is that we think that if you are using Github this is a good set= of practices and that we recommend them in that case. So while it's at= their discretion that doesn't mean we don't have an opinion.

Sure. But the document doesn't say it's at their discretion; it say= s that it's Best Current Practice for any WG that uses GitHub, and asse= rts a lot of MUSTs about them. The charter language is very specific for a = reason; this was discussed in depth, and there were multiple assurances tha= t WGs would "opt in" to this document.

=
You seem to be complaining about two separate things:
=
1. That it says it's Best Current Practice
2. = That it's not sufficiently clear it's optional.

I think that (2) is implicit in the following text:
   The m=
ain purpose of this document is providing guidelines for how
   Working Groups might integrate the capabilities provided by GitHub
   into their processes for developing Internet-Drafts.
Howe= ver, I wouldn't obj= ect to making it clearer. Perhaps: "The choice of whether to use Githu= b or whether to adopt these practices if they do is at the discretion of th= e WG". However, I would be sad to see us back off the claim that it= 9;s best current practice, because, as I said, that's the point of havi= ng a WG.

-Ekr




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

--000000000000bf879e05a09db679-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:52:38 2020 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 EE14E3A0ECD; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:52:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=mnot.net header.b=qkdsJR0L; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=cD+g0RkL 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 zD4RygBObVH2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:52:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F12D3A0ECC; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:52:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47D739BC; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:52:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:52:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=9 Z6YSviA7n+mgVlZ/hpBwtV/sz9y2GqbKAIaMw6GhrU=; b=qkdsJR0Lqbhfj/3zL UiuCmCc/jpBVfacA88mg7KGOchcSvDNjzCUae8etKlcN+F5HMA9VYb2AoeynOVpO Wdwmrkn7kC5AlZOnJqkHn0eTMwUjZBHNeDKagc3iPvZzzou7Rfm2VKYQMbfVlxIT Bx0EYRnUwEuLrQy/EVHP6DO444ZhjczuxrdgoehQVt8jDxwyCOO1My+KjsQxhLhb +jcDn7dl9lHENhJnGfJNiNEdIF1FRCvX9B9XCtrTIpv4P1dOpux+1n2TdQvJo4dQ 3pz5XRHIxIpDG/ZHbesPIRy/L/BfE6T8szRjYU0z60i8t8IB3e1fM8uvbghFAafv Ty6AA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=9Z6YSviA7n+mgVlZ/hpBwtV/sz9y2GqbKAIaMw6Gh rU=; b=cD+g0RkLtG8YPe5TnRChCJhI/bsWjQYF8xwsD5I3k51/tv8B5DwkEquLW 6FfCM2VrRTnB7WH4SKzNQPGB2wRVQassg0dF2fMHe+bsmyU5+ylWSezlXrJyT2Hn KwV8OwR8mp06Oi1x6R1EQJOFVdYp0ykbw8z/vgGfASz81bB49ViFTj8sDz0qwsKg 4+Vav9P7uj8zsFQh5Gzm73kmhsjSCND+kFBpVFEbax+M6f8wTQC0UwojzH0BB+4j i7CGRncOoX0J92/JrDex5Rpkmx8S66oEejUtzeczsG5t/AQltohNrmNCGsv83AHW lHaAa1Lkgd/vSrkC46Wo7yoXupx0Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedgfeelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtvdenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhk ucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinh epmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppeduudelrddujedrudehkedrvdehudenucevlhhushht vghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrd hnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 353183061393; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:52:25 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:52:23 +1100 Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG , Martin Thomson Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> <345ECA39-073C-4DFB-8D5D-8419B297ACFC@mnot.net> To: Eric Rescorla X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:52:32 -0000 > On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:48 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: >=20 > However, I wouldn't object to making it clearer. Perhaps: "The choice = of whether to use Github or whether to adopt these practices if they do = is at the discretion of the WG". That would help a lot, as would further clarification in the abstract = (as discussed).=20 > However, I would be sad to see us back off the claim that it's best = current practice, because, as I said, that's the point of having a WG. I'm not against it being a BCP with those clarifications -- although it = seems like there are continuing questions about what the normative force = of a BCP is. Happy to punt those to a later day, however. And I'd hate = to make you sad. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:54:36 2020 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 09D563A0EDA; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:54:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=mnot.net header.b=rY5d7rQ0; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=paO2JGdJ 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 rO0Ozost27vX; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:54:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4219C3A0ED7; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:54:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F0D3996; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:54:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:54:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=G +LLt4feVaCXLmlN+uUIFdxMcWkxTWoQqJcIlM/asS0=; b=rY5d7rQ0Yz+w45QVL KWy5lkAKbkggE/PxZpMbs+XuseMOuj+/wFuNo1DMrsn6lslfMeBbg/2f/41isVme rAH2UdWGqhN5rTLoQ9aXqok9n5zp2dn3LWG6+RiaqPH9I7CCmGqK2kuw2e9ekO6t HwGHMLCCkB+DnOCN34KdeiKofAFwolCSaqSTmrwXVJLRC/OyaSsHPMXeXzCQ7xrp tbkIdAdMr2HGmg2/uQhsnjv0P+KYQ8x3AKePMLnJBYdiKr1Umtf6H7sv/9OvAC3Y sIvWBvDj33yqA4weZuukr9Rb5g/PzCMe0l2IAyq1oujG8Xput2tfUnbZgovOhd+p mj+HQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=G+LLt4feVaCXLmlN+uUIFdxMcWkxTWoQqJcIlM/as S0=; b=paO2JGdJDeKGplsYEZ0Lv+moh+SmUIS7InBdmtNFpM0H4a7NhjsGRs19M yY0SSAyc/GuAR0OCuYr/h/p5Wmx+yJ2B1DuZs/Fw3TWVjozysmPyTsnfRzmXppj9 T9MESQvwyhN0ua39D93HOK1PNXy5tlNJXJgRscaFUFxuwbJtdaDuuePd9NuQDECP LhIZrcRARf8zd8sr5/N5+FWUFYAJYtYN8I1Lqh0ZbFKBwRe41KIIsuPlBMrpZrvn X6pEiihAQfuN5cbutE062Evkvg/O4hSAJHhgKWJQT3etkq54KEUyjuFG01lEJqXX 4bbOtoDeDqSYnsQiFOBK7LHtOTMOA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedgfeelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtvdenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhk ucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinh epghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhmnhhothdrnhgvthenucfkphepudduledrudejrdduheek rddvhedunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E63D2328005E; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:54:04 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:54:02 +1100 Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <75CC8665-8F5D-4F95-A052-F8BB0B0A4F23@mnot.net> References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> To: Martin Thomson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:54:10 -0000 All of those changes look much better, thanks. Regarding the multiple documents issue -- yes, it was indeed discussed. = I don't feel strongly about changing the language, unless this document = is seen as binding on all WGs that use Github (see rest of discussion). Cheers, > On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:44 am, Martin Thomson wrote: >=20 > Hi Mark, >=20 > Any input, even late input, is better than nothing. I appreciate you = spending the time. >=20 > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 11:23, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> * "Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub = for=20 >> anything more than managing drafts." This seems onerous; does it = mean=20 >> that I need to consult with the AD to host some tests (e.g.,=20 >> ), a repository = for=20 >> a wiki (e.g., ), working group=20= >> administrivia (), or a=20 >> translation ()? >=20 > Yes, this was not considered in the original drafting. There is a = proposed revision in = https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/commit/e74ba457de2f0843a42c1214= bec0033f559f187a >=20 >> * "Maintaining multiple documents in the same repository can add=20 >> overhead that negatively affects individual documents. For instance,=20= >> issues might require additional markings to identify the document = that=20 >> they affect. Also, because editors all have write access to the=20 >> repository, managing the set of people with write access to a larger=20= >> repository is more difficult (Section 3.3)." This is well-worn=20 >> territory, but there are also costs associated with having many=20 >> repositories -- both in terms of WG chair load, and in terms of=20 >> potential errors (as we're discovering in QUIC). >=20 > I believe that encouraging the use of separate repos is the consensus = outcome of working group discussions. You were involved. Suggestions = for different wordings are always welcome, of course. >=20 >> * "Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group=20 >> consensus MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is presented." =20= >> This seems to be pre-emptively establishing both the status of Github=20= >> issues in the IETF process, and the semantics of their state.=20 >=20 > There is a proposed revision in = https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/commit/b872e534db4c885cd3cbfaac= 64fff7d06d41c5d4 (though Chris later improved the text further, see the = PR: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 for more) >=20 >> * "Editors SHOULD create a new Internet-Draft submission two weeks=20 >> prior to every session..." How is this requirement specific to = Github? >=20 > It's a poor restatement of the (lowercase) recommendation that was = cited. I have reworded here: = https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/48 >=20 >> * Generally, there are a lot of RFC2119 terms that seem advisory, not=20= >> normative. Are they all well-considered? To give one example: = "Editors=20 >> SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes rather than=20 >> committing directly to the "master" branch of the repository." What=20= >> does it mean to violate that SHOULD? >=20 > A lot of these have been removed in response to reviews. Including = that example in response to Mirja's review: = https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/45 -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:57:13 2020 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 EBB993A0EDD for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:57:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=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 xKUV1Xjp7Liv for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22e.google.com (mail-lj1-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 316163A0EE3 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22e.google.com with SMTP id a10so4412640ljp.11 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:57:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=nnlRQVgfgBNfkxDnOLQIzWs8AgkNNKKhgxH2Zl/4tX4=; b=nms0d9BPTXALKCkgiwUIcwiDl3HTus6tnbWFcgRA+BLu6GVmJT2Gg/QsotBTMea94t QItSkr6roiUieQ2IXINx+zwyGM5JEAjJwotDQ83aykpF8nvxIE5y+lEWZObj4K9rMcZ+ Cf9bhXAuz0HxfU5KAOvX4V8kXrXj+yTwND2rS8ayT8eOd2ef8uQFP19lY4630o/KUKYj 7BiQGE37sqnli/9L97P9/RnoIGTz5rI40Hr1JnoHb9XX/XIE/YIPkRV7J6047AuHJp8H T3zVWik2CzARFJ4ePHgEj9icuFd8YwQHfoZwDysXKFb7Zl7vPt2QIu/EPB92AHlR2FJT obQw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=nnlRQVgfgBNfkxDnOLQIzWs8AgkNNKKhgxH2Zl/4tX4=; b=rW6Ud1UpoiKwRPY7wXeUMxZgWydV0pOjDXVYAePqxaH/HTw3H76wL1GqfbvuN6Bfjn G3ULbjeUV9Y0dpgzbqNJR3BaXGAOIX1eS5J63aDDuDIJUoVXpdY2s/Fsivk9HJareFHT 5o/ubviUSSCC2o1Y3G33yi+GIVWUC01xTWCoMO0w5Y9bqTpkgp6l/KeqC8Wt0+9A+xqq IadlLmtEDmlmJMAmMfv/JejgI9vXq/eTbnC0v6oqqRl5iBGv1r/VmdHvIul8/zmCDOAG BWVXZ8o21Lje/fdVCf+5qqx67TlhN2D7AZVNuC+i7vGkflCthCavvDSnjMRp2PODfUDn eunQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ29EpYlQBGgFTtwidqZNncvITNSq9CgE8PW4YhTPSsmcH4PYdFc TDZWr4lwVSG9omimBtunDtfm1134+nCVl+MGIXgfMNzw7H0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsaJx8mSUN/w7qGSmsD0vXV+/tUkq0uMieldvKRoAnNZbopsTYQys8gZnzTPs5wkF1e0cZXNjq1BnXOibkCSRQ= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:869a:: with SMTP id l26mr3482336lji.286.1583974627273; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:57:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> <345ECA39-073C-4DFB-8D5D-8419B297ACFC@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: From: Eric Rescorla Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:56:31 -0700 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG , Martin Thomson Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fe558f05a09dd48a" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:57:11 -0000 --000000000000fe558f05a09dd48a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:52 PM Mark Nottingham wrote: > > > > On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:48 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > However, I wouldn't object to making it clearer. Perhaps: "The choice of > whether to use Github or whether to adopt these practices if they do is at > the discretion of the WG". > > That would help a lot, as would further clarification in the abstract (as > discussed). > > > > However, I would be sad to see us back off the claim that it's best > current practice, because, as I said, that's the point of having a WG. > > I'm not against it being a BCP with those clarifications -- although it > seems like there are continuing questions about what the normative force of > a BCP is. Happy to punt those to a later day, however. And I'd hate to make > you sad. > I appreciate that To be clear, I actually don't care that much about document status: I do care about the statement that we think they are good. -Ekr > Cheers, > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > --000000000000fe558f05a09dd48a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:52 PM Mark = Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote= :


> On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:48 am, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
> However, I wouldn't object to making it clearer. Perhaps: "Th= e choice of whether to use Github or whether to adopt these practices if th= ey do is at the discretion of the WG".

That would help a lot, as would further clarification in the abstract (as d= iscussed).


> However, I would be sad to see us back off the claim that it's bes= t current practice, because, as I said, that's the point of having a WG= .

I'm not against it being a BCP with those clarifications -- although it= seems like there are continuing questions about what the normative force o= f a BCP is. Happy to punt those to a later day, however. And I'd hate t= o make you sad.

I appreciate that
=

To be clear, I actually don't care that much about = document status: I do care about the statement that we think they are good.=

-Ekr


Cheers,

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

--000000000000fe558f05a09dd48a-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 17:57:33 2020 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 3233B3A0EE3; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:57:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=ZDfTkKKk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=tG+8Z6xi 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 skU2A27tUWJV; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:57:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C32C53A0EE4; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:57:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21F8F22053; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:57:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:57:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=/g150uJT+qnCYSZq3OC6X1HTB9IU 0c4QOETSF2LWg/U=; b=ZDfTkKKkBr0HvestDlRmt7Fwb7LtX3C7V5p1uIkxVIwN e/sD8zCJBkMwjdhCy5MW+pAAGqonynSwJAYJu0B2cOLTVf0EkVx+m9Zc26wtMo4U kbJRwi0wrpbDJMJTsWdh8+EX/EB8Y4NSXugfzMbjOvUNdb6MrZ1zSNzv+vWuXjdi I6+blusY6IQFC3UmUX7r1WD/2+Q7g/Bhlm9E8+A1MRaUsGiNBMBUrXeM+TU1uS9x ekTIceiWeAry/ON0WO1Y4XJHcCeGCGLvwMYg3/yFXOLd1XKcTwWemhjY/XQfA4xf SS2VQsTRgQ7mEnZGdGsHTiYvKAEHppdzVXYFMtuwTw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=/g150u JT+qnCYSZq3OC6X1HTB9IU0c4QOETSF2LWg/U=; b=tG+8Z6xiVi3wLoUM9wzfXD EAtSda/aAh36dhaeJquIdXNwzetx5bti51WAT2fjya+A6s0w4TEmqdq7dDWpUN66 o3P6tLwiLVe5AehDaafG32moenJmqd02wd6GV+DBDBH1xPJHT7LE6Y6Notl5V1yY IRi1vzC4FUD8B3u7A71YPKHkUGGH2p+X4Dn6Z36Jiv2BG9sEsdxIpm/TLcHVmVfi KTTafUwZnUgOQgSqR0Z4XC4rcPQe0EqDTBS9fibsJmJ+Vzp84BEPbVuEBVqGpLng AlMuaMw2s7hW4+igXCAOoprzP2mzRVi2Rokhnhl9ys2Vy9SDgnQxLZq475axLclQ == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedggedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id C89D0E00B2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:57:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <5bb45a64-93db-4ff3-ba10-c3e306eed10f@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> <345ECA39-073C-4DFB-8D5D-8419B297ACFC@mnot.net> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:57:05 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Mark Nottingham" , "'Eric Rescorla'" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "The IESG" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Warren_Kumari=27s_Discuss_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 00:57:28 -0000 On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 11:52, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:48 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > > However, I wouldn't object to making it clearer. Perhaps: "The choice of whether to use Github or whether to adopt these practices if they do is at the discretion of the WG". > > That would help a lot, as would further clarification in the abstract > (as discussed). I've added that to the corresponding PR: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46 Thanks From nobody Wed Mar 11 18:09:46 2020 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 90E933A0CDC; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:09:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=mnot.net header.b=N9xqM+bP; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=mkN50nbv 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 hsT0_4olUcXI; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:09:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3FCE3A0D53; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:09:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4308854; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:09:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:09:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=S qHH/km1gKHQY/iwnd0VRMnklaceaB8vwp1uLN2uBnU=; b=N9xqM+bP1lJVRoG4t 6g2nobuDFu5hidLZt66ET5HNx8cM8uZojFKu5QIwhtY2BjM3GHuOsjZCX1l9i1zq jvBZL5o0VYS8/PlnguN0uEcfRWLYT8FxHQFmbicVtqCpAbaIF6D4/4Mip7/TFE07 Fp3BNCxBG5jDVwb/TijwhcHbryjg2bACLYf5JEKoVmRf7cQBduVwp27XOk3mpoeN 1/pZPwqL/hc5PoL4LqeYJuCCj1+UDuxp7qWwXG+dMx4KgDD9tObA6/B1zxZMA1TI oC9R8zQ8h3qPwjgBXK+B/6fplrK4HNTf8YqHaeTBS9XttOFmJnT2VBwyXMoGqRHs jxyBw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=SqHH/km1gKHQY/iwnd0VRMnklaceaB8vwp1uLN2uB nU=; b=mkN50nbv1DM0SN33qCahInQn3o8pcCukmS4i00qBEa+GRrGr4pUgbDjPv kVH1YHK+bp1/k+x7aAuHClH+zDMFRNuvzG8+3m/WYp+d1IYb61NWivU3F8nOhtog dZiHVMJ0Ly7QHrLtsW4lvq0eIX82ICW7r0xKr+DGCIbbkG5yLzZf5u4iVydogRam L3BM0NcyeYfL7if8F94Y66aj7KjjsvCOUcesI8Z+DCT8s89t69cae9W8PufpMPrn FTIWzE0Ft/sGGUqW14ZxEmBDKZK1bVfHwONG3ogk/zIVVIVs//oVuONcfAKkfcvx CiR61iBhvX4qjcp+09fPkkCZzvrdw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedggedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtvdenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhk ucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinh epghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhmnhhothdrnhgvthenucfkphepudduledrudejrdduheek rddvhedunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1B82F3280059; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:09:34 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <5bb45a64-93db-4ff3-ba10-c3e306eed10f@www.fastmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:09:32 +1100 Cc: Eric Rescorla , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> <345ECA39-073C-4DFB-8D5D-8419B297ACFC@mnot.net> <5bb45a64-93db-4ff3-ba10-c3e306eed10f@www.fastmail.com> To: Martin Thomson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 01:09:41 -0000 That's better, thanks. I'd prefer that the Abstract also be adjusted as = discussed, as it can be read to mislead, but can live with just the = change below. Cheers, > On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:57 am, Martin Thomson wrote: >=20 > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 11:52, Mark Nottingham wrote: >>> On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:48 am, Eric Rescorla wrote: >>>=20 >>> However, I wouldn't object to making it clearer. Perhaps: "The = choice of whether to use Github or whether to adopt these practices if = they do is at the discretion of the WG". >>=20 >> That would help a lot, as would further clarification in the abstract=20= >> (as discussed).=20 >=20 > I've added that to the corresponding PR: = https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46 >=20 > Thanks -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Mar 11 18:11:38 2020 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 F0A773A0EEA for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:11:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=uYDLWdhC; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=tOn1JJ/k 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 GTk0SiKSXnrc for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:11:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9189A3A0CDC for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:11:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B84E921E1C for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:11:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:11:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=o2/+o aCkkthJcZwwazkkdlMvANnhQLrh2zp73XCuZk4=; b=uYDLWdhCvd8hwCkTqh6MA 5J72W4+4zMTv9nr42M2HW9v7dOUMv9gmePnEwSLsbI6R+Ok7Xg78w++E5iSLEfPj fiWbaczxqFjHpVHHQHdbgPLUAfZbMKTgiPSn1cIoL2u6Msxz1iPncfAWspThFqEd MNgzXXiPDgXUBTecSC3MewkcrWDu1nSvDwyPZTohAdI87FJ8TS5TzGIZxp5xPhQq /F8a9+LExEJovRjSL7/WC844iBW3Rq0KwbuIxDxLNLzZ5m1wLgiorStZLkR6aV9A uj2CTYiJd6VxxBVsG6Z8EwK69OHB5evOwxGWxUmO4vM9urB8SbxsN9A5T/NhKofy w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=o2/+oaCkkthJcZwwazkkdlMvANnhQLrh2zp73XCuZ k4=; b=tOn1JJ/kB7Cj+qgOm+/r3w1weHiWEVxLrHYsJWtBesyb9fRpdI/lnDJz3 DPZoOd5lkJa50top/RyEorLQBHdi+QyLwyEBCMiSNfAIXrVGR0MzK8Wsx4R4rLjW 79/1KWQJyW1yw325XqNYbQflfboIWEG1wG1rTsw+ur0k1SbuyT/KMjyydgZ5E5mL wCXO6T3GTerj7CdfaWpoqgYj5GppFCzoHF0ubCwdUJeZ9yFcJ9FakRXxERJwgAqp /y2DbkbYicYIMNTW7uL6QVwrd+q/xjQVbTpMxhqA3kKtIebiovAxL0Uz4Oycg0Uu Vv43Ob3Y/VPdPBpnG0g3yeD8maVeA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedggeefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtgfesth hqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehl ohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenuc evlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhho figvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7F793E00D3; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:11:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1cb8d41d-268b-47bb-bcd6-911786d20191@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:11:02 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Adam_Roach=27s_No_Objection_on_draft?= =?utf-8?q?-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 01:11:37 -0000 On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 11:48, Adam Roach via Datatracker wrote: > GitHub is a service operated at https://github.com/ > (https://github.com/). >=20 > The parenthetical seems unnecessary. That's a consequence of attempting to turn the link into a link. In HTM= L, this looks fine and having a link is good. This is the result of the= xml2rfc text rendering. I'm opening an issue. =20 A couple of your comments are addressed already in https://github.com/ie= tf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 =20 > Section 3.2: > Repositories for private documents MAY > be kept private, but only where there is a specific reason for doin= g > so. >=20 > This seems really odd, completely undetectable/unenforceable, and actu= ally > harmful. It is common practice for editors to just keep their source l= ocal and > only submit the output of such source to the i-d repository; and that=E2= =80=99s just > fine. This seems to say that such users are effectively forbidden to h= ave their > source equally private but also effectively backed-up and revision-con= trolled > by one specific online service. It seems strictly better to allow and = even > encourage this, to prevent a loss of data. I might revise this statement. As you say, it's meaningless. But the a= dmonition about operating in secret is probably worth retaining. How ab= out: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/49 From nobody Wed Mar 11 18:19:35 2020 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 3B8D33A104B for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:19:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=YlSRZL8x; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=1IQM4NVT 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 nGMpsffsZO_W for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:19:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDE2C3A0FEA for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C551220F1; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:19:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:19:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=eI wCL/UtzznP1IIM3ZqkPhvmHRfshhxg1T6eBD1vpXg=; b=YlSRZL8xN9Gh4G2Rr/ n8j1JgiwOC4CpQf1vhYTeQIQw8IrH18tI7uj5otF2vx8neVNTCOtN2UJ//eOAMR5 CoyTEsC4xB7gytxUsAniiuZmm4nbOmUa141kVesMG4dHIwXVkE/Ak04WoZJ90lOk V8TqSAKBM3s2W22CrTfF7wA+LLqIS2KsikEI/msWdqSUL0PR4u3SDe6iZsX8o6kw cAIawC0XyotKW+QTFYve5/SXI60Nh0Fm19dBWDMygF0Msn8iq1O8JA0R5YjBIMP0 4+Gy+8rFHJyKDDXdOJuKXijvGHzQ16Wr5kyiy/I7fg3wPmM+QGSy3tKKk5gMEfx8 BGYw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=eIwCL/UtzznP1IIM3ZqkPhvmHRfshhxg1T6eBD1vp Xg=; b=1IQM4NVTFWA/wJDI9MFtOBrWvKjjZu2CcMJRNxR8heRoU7BNa3eFbt+Lv SttVZU+L5yL9Is2rlyhudsxpTGqkNI1+uEWJevyGmfQ6x7iYLXrUxIZ/dopuqCsr SQRAz6rFIl0qpDEHTYo1QAXf00RWNeL3RnXNoX9uwP+4mw3F0EGLRj+xjoOEbXgh OBwEDXNAFKNfrB2txwyIjXaqZiK128FjnJ8golkA7Ez7JjRxloX11bMbsfy0gSRg 3vbbHWX/cjti4nbQq/t0kCiwbA/Gsn+x1dnVdqiF1pz3HcULhhs8X23NYNvY6xBp aKQX7hFjfC//34UvUaP15mEHNM/CA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedggeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtgfesth hqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehl ohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhdpih gvthhfrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhf rhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id BE144E00B2; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:19:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <443bf4f4-3a70-4be4-8012-cf0acc362776@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1cb8d41d-268b-47bb-bcd6-911786d20191@www.fastmail.com> References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> <1cb8d41d-268b-47bb-bcd6-911786d20191@www.fastmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:19:04 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Cc: abr@nostrum.com Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Adam_Roach=27s_No_Objection_on_draft?= =?utf-8?q?-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 01:19:34 -0000 As an aside, I just worked out how to do bare links in kramdown. It's n= ot intuitive. BAD: [https://github.com](https://github.com) BAD: GOOD: [](https://github.com) On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 12:11, Martin Thomson wrote: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 11:48, Adam Roach via Datatracker wrote: > > GitHub is a service operated at https://github.com/ > > (https://github.com/). > >=20 > > The parenthetical seems unnecessary. >=20 > That's a consequence of attempting to turn the link into a link. In=20= > HTML, this looks fine and having a link is good. This is the result o= f=20 > the xml2rfc text rendering. I'm opening an issue. > =20 > A couple of your comments are addressed already in=20 > https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 > =20 > > Section 3.2: > > Repositories for private documents MAY > > be kept private, but only where there is a specific reason for do= ing > > so. > >=20 > > This seems really odd, completely undetectable/unenforceable, and ac= tually > > harmful. It is common practice for editors to just keep their source= local and > > only submit the output of such source to the i-d repository; and tha= t=E2=80=99s just > > fine. This seems to say that such users are effectively forbidden to= have their > > source equally private but also effectively backed-up and revision-c= ontrolled > > by one specific online service. It seems strictly better to allow an= d even > > encourage this, to prevent a loss of data. >=20 > I might revise this statement. As you say, it's meaningless. But the= =20 > admonition about operating in secret is probably worth retaining. How= =20 > about: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/49 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Wed Mar 11 18:31:18 2020 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 7F5203A1088 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:31:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.078 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.078 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.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 lFGIrknvv4Vv for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05FB43A10D6 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:31:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.17.121.48] (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 02C1V9WT074585 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:31:10 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1583976671; bh=SCbD/3ZCE4FbRZxMiJsksHFBeIpVtoggqVJ3/HOvdLw=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=UsNbikFtJBqr5MubBfprYsDjLJGu4F4w9Xe+G5YIUSRJ4fFKy5mO+osV1R+rqfYvr 2cLhxjZ6Ez+SDtYVM4yeePU7Cs+XS8JreWjGjrZCQMIS3cza3N/4RmcsXsT5OgYakA JEOKX7wPh3UXXCFuSR9CaKR5vR0cfpp2iHRUv8Ac= X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be [172.17.121.48] To: Martin Thomson , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Cc: abr@nostrum.com References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> <1cb8d41d-268b-47bb-bcd6-911786d20191@www.fastmail.com> <443bf4f4-3a70-4be4-8012-cf0acc362776@www.fastmail.com> From: Adam Roach Message-ID: <41e0bcff-42dc-5e79-18b2-98b790ded742@nostrum.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:31:03 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <443bf4f4-3a70-4be4-8012-cf0acc362776@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------4C0A93ABF620F5F58A9E27BB" Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 01:31:16 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------4C0A93ABF620F5F58A9E27BB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 3/11/2020 8:19 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: >> Section 3.2: >> Repositories for private documents MAY >> be kept private, but only where there is a specific reason for doing >> so. >> >> This seems really odd, completely undetectable/unenforceable, and actually >> harmful. It is common practice for editors to just keep their source local and >> only submit the output of such source to the i-d repository; and that’s just >> fine. This seems to say that such users are effectively forbidden to have their >> source equally private but also effectively backed-up and revision-controlled >> by one specific online service. It seems strictly better to allow and even >> encourage this, to prevent a loss of data. > I might revise this statement. As you say, it's meaningless. But the > admonition about operating in secret is probably worth retaining. How > about:https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/49 Thanks. The removal of normative language is an improvement, but the guidance appears to be the same. I think there's a difference of perception here. I agree that an open repository is better than a private one; but I also think that a private repository is strictly better than not using an SCM at all, and I'm more concerned about the implications of this language on the second point than the first. /a --------------4C0A93ABF620F5F58A9E27BB Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On 3/11/2020 8:19 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
Section 3.2:
   Repositories for private documents MAY
   be kept private, but only where there is a specific reason for doing
   so.

This seems really odd, completely undetectable/unenforceable, and actually
harmful. It is common practice for editors to just keep their source local and
only submit the output of such source to the i-d repository; and that’s just
fine. This seems to say that such users are effectively forbidden to have their
source equally private but also effectively backed-up and revision-controlled
by one specific online service. It seems strictly better to allow and even
encourage this, to prevent a loss of data.

I might revise this statement.  As you say, it's meaningless.  But the 
admonition about operating in secret is probably worth retaining.  How 
about: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/49


Thanks. The removal of normative language is an improvement, but the guidance appears to be the same. I think there's a difference of perception here. I agree that an open repository is better than a private one; but I also think that a private repository is strictly better than not using an SCM at all, and I'm more concerned about the implications of this language on the second point than the first.

/a

--------------4C0A93ABF620F5F58A9E27BB-- From nobody Wed Mar 11 18:36:23 2020 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 8000C3A1025 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:36:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=KrKfdNuA; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=vBImDebr 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 uyIhNa2dV0q7 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2BA53A102E for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB2EB22027; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:36:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:36:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=XA +paJwYoT4fwjagD+9RT7P0XAGRL5KnvQtlBxEtBNI=; b=KrKfdNuAR+VifN/YJ7 J63FcTuMwpvwDiLOSVnT1iBIttFiowY7WKDTnQzJAGtT9lI8b5FO8VqD8L5hzxT7 Dj08ZyJ+F+Ee4ES5I8X6uhri9rUCcLNeim0INNVIyzGIVH7mbMBDmLEKW48dUL40 zwvljbXZDWt+guTLVSNfIsLvORRHTaDF3nMavedb1z9fgze66XoZ+WpkIWvo4cmz 7KeRG3No3vB+37YFLb7Q0IQrKQfh9Q//bZw//Uw6LRxO9o5AnfryuhRmZPolF/w0 Upkp4XUd/XXDmmJSheBEm8wWuSMWLFtQv3YcsIJupzTh+XYBXGUIDDgwSolK/tx0 +weA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=XA+paJwYoT4fwjagD+9RT7P0XAGRL5KnvQtlBxEtB NI=; b=vBImDebrieDDgiQIb0laftlH3ubBTy4/fUoAtnLv3FXM55yrXGRfocfWt NHGPODp6rR/fO67qrlrtEQTTuUdzTMA8gbzKYttIpmRBE8/1z07xIQuEtWQ5f75P woDcKPfAJiRF1kMaLpXp6dxHxilVvegxiIigsFU6uq33WR2Zh/ANwn0ukrB9kpoQ 6BNKGuqgxbosKwv8wYQOdffC5y+0BDYYbFicvezcOgGQnGAbheJh5YvtDEQhgYF+ jjGwja+IztUd4PQa3Ri8xPwC2n8uzLZ87dASCXFyM3WTz9Vpu1V7OG04PQKM8Yz/ 1g++De/CwFAk+er+3QGXVJsyoPi7g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvgedggeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfr rghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id AF08AE010A; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:36:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <77effcfa-c1ce-461f-9b62-2160410ae585@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <41e0bcff-42dc-5e79-18b2-98b790ded742@nostrum.com> References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> <1cb8d41d-268b-47bb-bcd6-911786d20191@www.fastmail.com> <443bf4f4-3a70-4be4-8012-cf0acc362776@www.fastmail.com> <41e0bcff-42dc-5e79-18b2-98b790ded742@nostrum.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:35:59 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Adam Roach" , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Cc: abr@nostrum.com Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Adam_Roach=27s_No_Objection_on_draft?= =?utf-8?q?-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 01:36:22 -0000 On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 12:31, Adam Roach wrote: > On 3/11/2020 8:19 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > >> Section 3.2: > Repositories for private documents MAY > be kept private, but only where there is a specific reason for doin= g > so. >=20 > This seems really odd, completely undetectable/unenforceable, and actu= ally > harmful. It is common practice for editors to just keep their source l= ocal and > only submit the output of such source to the i-d repository; and that=E2= =80=99s just > fine. This seems to say that such users are effectively forbidden to h= ave their > source equally private but also effectively backed-up and revision-con= trolled > by one specific online service. It seems strictly better to allow and = even > encourage this, to prevent a loss of data. > > I might revise this statement. As you say, it's meaningless. But t= he=20 > admonition about operating in secret is probably worth retaining. How= =20 > about: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/49 >=20 >=20 > Thanks. The removal of normative language is an improvement, but the=20= > guidance appears to be the same. I think there's a difference of=20 > perception here. I agree that an open repository is better than a=20 > private one; but I also think that a private repository is strictly=20= > better than not using an SCM at all, and I'm more concerned about the=20= > implications of this language on the second point than the first. (Weird quoting...) The advice was intended to be about Working Groups doing official busine= ss in private. Do you think that the new language is wrong in principle= , or is it that I've just made a hash of the transcription of the concep= t? For reference: > Maintaining private repositories for Working Group documents is not re= commended without specific cause. For instance, a document that details= a security vulnerability might be kept private prior to its initial pub= lication as an Internet-Draft. Once an Internet-Draft is published, repo= sitories SHOULD be made public. From nobody Wed Mar 11 18:40:18 2020 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 77A353A107C for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:40:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.079 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.079 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.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 GZjnwh-WBALG for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A8F63A1093 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.17.121.48] (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 02C1eBGL076237 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:40:12 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1583977213; bh=czZtVwEdjFjZveXwLDubNlRqYoC7dUo83sRof/G0TFw=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=jZvMQ51paxlewqtu3bW4NQ35o0np/6KraN4yPF0Bze/U+ZCMk9lDxXuaM0auytcNW 757oilYnsvv0XRBBaBrsTQ7CZB+SPudExA73ngnKiae1WZ4qEPAMSipVy+iPddxw6K queWKSMR8xfBpHd2f4GuqkOmw6U4hstgNL0cuRvE= X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be [172.17.121.48] To: Martin Thomson , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Cc: abr@nostrum.com References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> <1cb8d41d-268b-47bb-bcd6-911786d20191@www.fastmail.com> <443bf4f4-3a70-4be4-8012-cf0acc362776@www.fastmail.com> <41e0bcff-42dc-5e79-18b2-98b790ded742@nostrum.com> <77effcfa-c1ce-461f-9b62-2160410ae585@www.fastmail.com> From: Adam Roach Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:40:05 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <77effcfa-c1ce-461f-9b62-2160410ae585@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 01:40:16 -0000 On 3/11/2020 8:35 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > The advice was intended to be about Working Groups doing official business in private. Do you think that the new language is wrong in principle, or is it that I've just made a hash of the transcription of the concept? Private to whom? If you're talking about authors setting up repositories that only the author or authors can get to, I think the guidance is off. Such behavior should be considered neutral to good, as the alternative is virtually guaranteed to be not using an SCM at all. If you're talking about a WG repository that is private but that can be accessed by some non-author subset of a working group, then I agree that's a problem. If that's in line with the discussion in the working group, then I think it's possible to write language that distinguishes between these two cases. /a From nobody Wed Mar 11 22:06:39 2020 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 CBC303A0E4E; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 22:06:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Roman Danyliw Message-ID: <158398957673.19710.3032514966699060242@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 22:06:16 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 05:06:17 -0000 Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I support Mirja Kühlewind DISCUSS position and agree with the Alvaro’s Retana’s comment ** Section 3. It seems like a stronger statement should be: s/It would be good for working group GitHub content to also be backed up and publicly archived/Working group GitHub content needs to be backed up and publicly archived/ ** Section 4. The text would benefit from noting that the risk of centralization is recognized, but mitigated by the plan described in Section 3.2. From nobody Wed Mar 11 23:03:35 2020 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 59E003A1025; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:03:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Roman Danyliw Message-ID: <158399301327.19705.8890772742138829164@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:03:33 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 06:03:34 -0000 Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ** I support Alvaro Retana’s DISCUSS position ** I philosophically agree with much of what Warren Kumari noted, and like Deborah Brungard and Adam Roach, I would have been more comfortable with an information document (given how the normative language was used). However, the charter of the WG was to deliver a BCP and this document is it. ** I strongly concur with Mirja Kühlewind point #12, that we should be careful about guidance on when to publish the I-D. For all of the virtues of using GitHub to reach new audiences, not all audiences will check there, so regular I-D updates when major changes are made is important. Left unsaid for me from the feedback of my colleagues was: ** Section 10. As there are no plans to formally backup anything beyond the repos and the mail, the mitigation of “[t]ools exist for extracting this information for backup” seems weak. One of the real appeals of GitHub is that information/those services and their respective integrations. Hence, what are those tools? Who should take responsibility for that backup (if anyone)? Why aren’t they being backed up? From nobody Wed Mar 11 23:58:40 2020 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 A21FA3A11C0; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:58:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Benjamin Kaduk Message-ID: <158399631853.19777.5084686659454584666@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:58:38 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 06:58:39 -0000 Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm not quite sure this needs to be published (in terms of archival value), but don't feel strongly enough to post an Abstain position. Section 1 conventions proposed here: that is fine. The goal of the proposals in this document is not to require uniformity in current practice, but to help working groups get started using GitHub in a uniform way if desired. It seems like perhaps the uniformity is not the key part (since we've disclaimed total uniformity and endorsed WG sovreignity), but rather that the set of practices has been reviewed and validated already. Section 2 Should we give commit hashes for the listed examples of automation so as to provide a stable reference? Section 2.4 So those ADs at time of closing are privileged and retain access indefinitely? Section 3.1 [I mentioned CONTRIBUTING vs. CONTRIBUTING.md on the other doc, and cross-document consistency is good.] From nobody Thu Mar 12 00:00:09 2020 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 A8CCF3A11D5; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 00:00:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Benjamin Kaduk Message-ID: <158399640667.19763.6579678147144027590@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 00:00:06 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 07:00:07 -0000 Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I support Alvaro's Discuss. In the vein of other comments, are we providing "best practices" (Abstract) or "guidelines" (Introduction")? Section 1 Although similar, guidance for IRTF Research Groups is out of scope for this document. However, such groups may draw inspiration for GitHub use from the contents herein. The guidance is similar or the groups are similar? Section 1.2 There are a large number of projects at GitHub and a very large community of contributors. One way in which some IETF Working Groups have benefited is through increased numbers of reviews and associated issues, along with other improvements that come from broader Benefited, I presume, from their use of github? Section 2.1 Organizations are a way of forming groups of contributors on GitHub. Each Working Group SHOULD create a new organization for the Working Group. A Working Group organization SHOULD be named consistently so that it can be found. For instance, the name could be ietf- wg-, as recommended in [GH-CONFIG]. I'm not sure I understand why the recommended value for consistency is given in the Informational document as opposed to the BCP. A single organization SHOULD NOT be used for all IETF activity, or all activity within an area. Large organizations create too much overhead for general management tasks, particularly when there is a need to maintain membership. Is this a membership list or membership that's synchronized with something else, or ...? Each organization requires owners. The owner team for a Working nit(?): maybe "github's procedures require that each organization has owners"? Each organization requires owners. The owner team for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area Directors. Area Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an owner and Working Group chairs MAY also be owners. A team with administrator access SHOULD be created for the Working We seem to have introduced the github concept of "team" in passing here; a more prominent note might be helpful. Section 2.2 A simple example of how to do this is to include a link to the GitHub organization on the WG Charter page in the datatracker. Similarly, if there are multiple mailing list options, links to those mailing lists should be given. Multiple mailing lists would be, e.g., to get different volume of notifications from github? I don't think we've introduced any mention of "there are mailing lists other than the main WG list" yet. Repositories MUST include a copy or reference to the policy that nit: "copy of" applies to managing any documents they contain. Updating the README or CONTRIBUTING file in the repository with details of the process It's slightly surprising to see the non-.md version of these files mentioned, but I don't have any reason why it specifically matters. that new contributors need. The README SHOULD contain a link to the CONTRIBUTING file. Should/can the README contain anything else? Section 3 Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for anything more than managing drafts. I think I saw another comment about this bit (but probably not all the replies); it seems like the intent is more along the lines of "issue tracker" type things than "slides for WG sessions", so clarification is in order. Section 3.1 Working Group policies need to be set with the goal of improving transparency, participation, and ultimately the quality of the consensus behind documents. At times, it might be appropriate to Is there an example of how the policies might affect quality of consensus. (Also, does "quality of the documents" or even "quality of the protocol being documented" not matter?) Section 3.4 In addition to the canonical XML format [RFC7991], document editors [I'll channel Julian Reschke and note that RFC 7991 does not describe the exact XML vocabulary used for the canonical RFC output...] Section 4.1.1 If labels are a core part of Working Group process, chairs MUST communicate any process to the Working Group. This includes the (We already said that chairs have to communicate the process to the WG, regardless of whether issues are a core part of it or not.) Section 5.2 In addition to managing documents, the Working Group might choose to use GitHub for tracking outstanding issues. In this mode of interaction, all substantive technical discussions are tracked as issues in the issue tracker. However, discussion of any substantial Is it the discussions themselves that are tracked, or the existence of the topic being discussed? Section 5.3 Decisions about Working Group consensus MUST always be confirmed using the Working Group mailing list. However, depending on the maturity of documents, this might be a more lightweight interaction, such as sending an email confirmation for a set of resolutions made using GitHub. Perhaps "an initial set of resolutions arrived at by the GitHub participants"? Section 5.3.1 review. Finally, process checkpoints like Working Group Last Call (WGLC; Section 7.4 of [RFC2418]) provides additional safeguards against abuse. This section is "Early Design Phases"; would a document move directly from "early design phase" to WGLC without some other intermediate step which would allow for detection of such abuse? (In light of the following paragraph perhaps the best approach is to change the name used to describe this phase.) Section 5.4 Working Groups or editors might use additional labels as they choose. Any label that is used as part of a process requires that the process be documented and announced by Working Group chairs. Editors SHOULD be permitted to use labels to manage issues without any formal process significance being attached to those issues. Is there some conflict between "WG chairs must document and announce process" and "editors are permitted to use labels without any formal process significance"? I'm not really sure I understand what this is trying to say. Section 6 This creates a stable snapshot and makes the content of the in- progress document available to a wider audience. Documents submitted Is "wider audience" code for "the traditional IETF mode of work"? Stuff on github seems ... pretty available, as does the I-D archive; it's hard to have much confidence in a claim that one has a "wider audience" than the other. Section 7 If permitted, GitHub will be used for technical discussion and decisions, especially during early stages of development of a document. Any decisions are ultimately confirmed through review, and ultimately, through Working Group Last Call (see Section 7.4 of [RFC2418]). I'm not sure I understand what is meant by "review". Section 10 I agree with Roman that it's surprising to mention that tools for backing up "other information" exist but not make any recommendation for their usage. We could perhaps mention the potential consequences due to authentication breach at github (minimal, due to distributed backups and the I-D archive). From nobody Thu Mar 12 03:14:09 2020 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 394173A08FD; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:14:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 QN9o4TFrbfdE; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:14:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x52e.google.com (mail-ed1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52e]) (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 6D62C3A08FB; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:14:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id dc19so6673020edb.10; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:14:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=OuvdlYP5GADFHzV5rFz4vkhNZcnI8c5oHqtccPqJQrc=; b=tPHIne4dmd4APB9785N2fYG48nyUTf5toDOaLFYiT2yzZbEr8l4dGYK3BJCSvM450M oBIgFqnhlmtfsPYKJ2GCO9wv9P06/5NnPJPHJgfK6I4z//iyVb1iva3tCrZVpZZA4E4b VCOr7AU977+8GwFiVYO+knyKcllN5kcAJlo4B8ClniISRLQwtswiYjqicNlk8lBFCGO6 YT/2JjAImWdQPvlgfuPbzdQ5kuQCdnOJUelhvZSv0gGctzIPxc8fWmae3zR4KSU5JKbG mBHa36s539lLJuCModIQi06dHL33Vd1OasJAfQ7m14J9uq1zKKxiAzXig8ui0McwzGQz chhg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OuvdlYP5GADFHzV5rFz4vkhNZcnI8c5oHqtccPqJQrc=; b=DNSaQg7Es22DWf8iHrzfO1xGLru9dtEdfT0s9/uvwuOwNqxU1WiRSA6o44v6vEQNEQ 3R2YFuLzVDQ0Kk/szZH9dCu/VMThqPIX3dimM21SwNsNZIky2bmiEokxy00PLiSa2Tog b14JLJXb7CNZj+WkdDc3DuMdf73Zv9/ExnPBoeXZSB8yetOmgsiMcFPX8mLJ0Hcbaylp eeh5rNWHdoS6eS4KNKJoegwEEZa3thgiihtbq3V8VvpwHPWxpctJRecdKlJNkJPME0kh J+I2DyORy3U5TWpXcB+Mhr2a8U8P18Zu2XWdzyPXTCZ2v0PmJ5h2IwBe4JelyYxGVEAL +A7g== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ10tdCraWTDYF8pTmjsIb4INVVeZ0WsiGzOqEtUkXRw10J5gjdr AnXsG7Ld/xj0QQmY8FSlho6p5jfxkow+oOmrTOOL2hQy X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvRKyebapAQC7pfVDYmBMthlkFZ2L7lES2lnASsyPKsvg2mr9RyQraVWkmE9qKfh85gHdCK3UtjtzO9dQmE1U8= X-Received: by 2002:a50:ab1e:: with SMTP id s30mr1354389edc.336.1584008040000; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:14:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:13:59 -0700 From: Alvaro Retana In-Reply-To: References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:13:59 -0700 Message-ID: To: Martin Thomson , The IESG Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org, "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , Christopher Wood , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 10:14:04 -0000 On March 11, 2020 at 7:17:23 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: Martin: Hi! > Thanks for the feedback. I think that we'll pursue the DISCUSS thing > separately. Sure. > I want to (attempt to) discharge your comments. All your answers look fine to me. Thanks! Alvaro. From nobody Thu Mar 12 03:54:26 2020 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 B273C3A0CA2; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:54:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Alexey Melnikov via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net, francesca.palombini@ericsson.com X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Alexey Melnikov Message-ID: <158401045464.18284.15108949717034351202@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:54:14 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Alexey Melnikov's Yes on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 10:54:22 -0000 Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (Updated, see comments from Francesca below) I am agreeing with many issues raised by Mirja. ********************************************************************** * Note, that I am conducting an experiment when people aspiring to be* * Area Directors get exposed to AD work ("AD shadowing experiment"). * * As a part of this experiment they get to review documents on IESG * * telechats according to IESG Discuss criteria document and their * * comments get relayed pretty much verbatim to relevant editors/WGs. * * As an AD I retain responsibility in defending their position when * * I agree with it. * * Recipients of these reviews are encouraged to reply to me directly * * about perceived successes or failures of this experiment. * ********************************************************************** The following comments were provided by Francesca Palombini . My comments are marked with [[Alexey:]] below. Francesca would have balloted *YES* on this document. She wrote: Comment: I see the value of the document stating: "if you use GitHub, this is the best practice, if you want to follow it." The document motivates covering GitHub by stating that it has "a very large community of contributors". I still think some additional considerations should be there about using other services, possibly having IETF hosting a git server, even by saying "it is out of scope of this document" (implying it might be covered by a different BCP?). Section 4.1 "When deciding to use GitHub..." I'd like a sentence saying that WG chairs SHOULD evaluate over time and MAY change these policies based on the WG experience. I do think what described in this document is very valuable, but let's not forget that each WG is different and might need to make tweaks on the way, to get the best out of it. -- Just reached Section 5 where this is stated. Still think it would be good to have it in Section 4.1 as well. From nobody Thu Mar 12 03:56:15 2020 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 4BD153A0B5F; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:56:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Alexey Melnikov via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net, francesca.palombini@ericsson.com X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Alexey Melnikov Message-ID: <158401056823.18300.16488902811081953276@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 03:56:08 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 10:56:09 -0000 Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ********************************************************************** * Note, that I am conducting an experiment when people aspiring to be* * Area Directors get exposed to AD work ("AD shadowing experiment"). * * As a part of this experiment they get to review documents on IESG * * telechats according to IESG Discuss criteria document and their * * comments get relayed pretty much verbatim to relevant editors/WGs. * * As an AD I retain responsibility in defending their position when * * I agree with it. * * Recipients of these reviews are encouraged to reply to me directly * * about perceived successes or failures of this experiment. * ********************************************************************** The following comments were provided by Francesca Palombini . Francesca would have balloted *No Objections* on this document. She wrote: Comment: This draft is informational, but does put up requirements on IETF Secretariat and tools team in order for readers to follow its possible use (develop certain features, add certain tasks to IETF Secretariat). I see this draft as both a wish list (valid at this point in time) and a guideline. If it would contain only the possible guideline, I would understand that publishing it would have value, but as it is I am not sure: what does publishing it add to having the draft itself? From nobody Thu Mar 12 04:00:34 2020 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 DDC2A3A0C5A; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 04:00:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Martin Vigoureux via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Martin Vigoureux Message-ID: <158401082788.18076.104688218811852864@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 04:00:27 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 11:00:28 -0000 Martin Vigoureux has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi, I share most of the concerns raised by my co-ADs. What I'd really like to see is some clarifications added such that it is clear that these recommandations are not for all IETF WGs. There is a sentence which aims at stating that: The requirements here apply to the case where Working Groups decide to use GitHub as a primary means of interaction. But in fact before that one can also read: The intent is to allow each Working Group ... and after that: Each Working Group SHOULD create ... Each Working Group MAY ... plus many occurrences of "Working Groups" (plural). To resolve the ambiguity may be you could do: The intent is to allow a Working Group considerable flexibility in how it uses GitHub. The Working Group SHOULD create its own new organisation. The Working Group MAY ... And/or maybe reinforce the first sentence by clarifying that, in the rest of the document, "Working Groups" refer to working groups which have decided to use GitHub. -m From nobody Thu Mar 12 04:47:58 2020 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 3CE9B3A0D85; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 04:47:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=KJiaEm5c; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=GFN5JL7S 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 3as-SS7lRp6O; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 04:47:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3F4A3A0DC7; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 04:47:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1064; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584013665; x=1585223265; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=VYfl5S3TIua43TXWuHkqiNzCPcZpamIbnhjatm/FsQA=; b=KJiaEm5c9Gw4Y8/ZkxlE3s5Rid8juzUzrnul40APxROJMjda8G0LLsq0 0ArQ6o3uOwP/KMVFZIWiQnXh249OtgGmudN8i4g5akhIX+iqsViimwc3U +fLyACHOYpFx8+4OjF2r6enmYLAPHsUVD5UdDMQaRWWMf8ziL8Ljrov8x E=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3A3Rb3yhJmIWzKgHg+mdmcpTVXNCE6p7X5OBIU4Z?= =?us-ascii?q?M7irVIN76u5InmIFeBvad2lFGcW4Ld5roEkOfQv636EU04qZea+DFnEtRXUg?= =?us-ascii?q?Mdz8AfngguGsmAXEDlPfjhbCESF8VZX1gj9Ha+YgBY?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DTBQAGIWpe/51dJa1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFbFggBAsqhBWDRQOKb4I6mDuCUgNUCQEBAQwBASMKAgQ?= =?us-ascii?q?BAYRDAheBfiQ4EwIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEFBG2FVgyFZAIBAxIREQwBATEGAQ8?= =?us-ascii?q?CAQgaAiYCAgIwFRACBAENJ4MEAYJKAy4BDqAiAoE5iGJ1gTKCfwEBBYEvAYN?= =?us-ascii?q?+GIIMAwaBDiqMLxqBQT+BEScMFIJNPoJkAQWBSRiDETKCLJBun0sKgjyWbR2?= =?us-ascii?q?bPo8Bl3NRgxUCBAIEBQIOAQEFgWkigT8RCHAVZQGCDQEBMlAYDY4dg3OFFIV?= =?us-ascii?q?BdIEpjREBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,544,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="470371410" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 12 Mar 2020 11:47:45 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02CBli1G015879 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:47:44 GMT Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:47:44 -0500 Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:47:43 -0400 Received: from NAM12-MW2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:47:43 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=blJtcdPRJmdRJtMMVlnSXZGf4UcatBT/Fcf9T82EBU7iky+3WH3vbdU7ujcyQCYChQkl4B17udg65DHRTuX3qUk0r87yyck+ofjZMuzBUD9KPIgNUo6yXk9HdTmjUueMNc/bLXJLG8TIVYHEe4zHvCaCPN562gp/ckBQIoYlZ9mizCgR5fHuKdv6UZE70b3S2uT84D+z55qr9LejzfGeUAxTaT7zsVr6oesbE4fykLs5yFAfkXdLFJVmyjJgYN9TsiZfSIjutMjdu+6nbhNJaYLjtnkFnEry5KBGMi2dfGUGNNA82tFTrhsBpK83zlYICdWREkNAupjZp233DA4Y3A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=VYfl5S3TIua43TXWuHkqiNzCPcZpamIbnhjatm/FsQA=; b=niy8b4OS4z0aPzdDUdQNpOhDG6wqPmDr8rW1b47TJe3fNfWmPz+j6TugsheC5KFhKt1hN/4o2zs+wv306Hcw+V6xCHxwM58e2YBbXZw22UuAaY+Lx2IFjD+o6uQaYlV2dH3UxGq5r3YY/YasyrAqUmYKQBc1CE8wIm7RBh1iB+fG67c3vM9eZxBe6X79AqsZNS3fidvAMlOFitfVjptg5oiiqjXK0l80oFyOOnYDsQtwcq0DNAad581Y20C7c7wqEVWQbZVwt3UveX4PVIowRaM3VUn5my8Htkr3sg9enHHy0il5rQb+0HB/VB8UG8XN6aVZC5f2ALu1ikpkqcYJ/A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=VYfl5S3TIua43TXWuHkqiNzCPcZpamIbnhjatm/FsQA=; b=GFN5JL7S58YFwxCSh83Jv/0vIM8luGXB1Zj5gPzNZ9WQwNrtYjNv/Mbu8gv86ktj+iKSwp1Kokk4I/u+q91LWeAK23OTe4SuryaUxXvmljVk/dVMHtiEz/qFvHP9DW1brYZHK4BDJ/jerOrxrQVnhVS8xgnBAvOdOQehlw6QNnc= Received: from DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:10d::13) by DM5PR11MB1596.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:b::17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.16; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:47:42 +0000 Received: from DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::680d:e22e:72d5:67ca]) by DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::680d:e22e:72d5:67ca%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.018; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:47:42 +0000 From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" To: Adam Roach , The IESG CC: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "caw@heapingbits.net" Thread-Topic: Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV+AgLFXzjrD2uWEmJ718kXMLuoqhE6MWA Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:47:42 +0000 Message-ID: <0F866C65-65A3-4956-A187-FF39C55E7C43@cisco.com> References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: fr-BE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=evyncke@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c1:36:95d8:c521:e8d6:9a44] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b1f0f8ef-649a-4924-f6e8-08d7c67b2c41 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR11MB1596: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7219; x-forefront-prvs: 0340850FCD x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(376002)(39860400002)(366004)(136003)(346002)(199004)(5660300002)(2616005)(36756003)(478600001)(6512007)(33656002)(86362001)(6486002)(66574012)(76116006)(71200400001)(186003)(81156014)(81166006)(110136005)(8676002)(54906003)(4744005)(316002)(8936002)(2906002)(6506007)(66556008)(66476007)(64756008)(966005)(66446008)(4326008)(66946007)(91956017); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR11MB1596; H:DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 6XmRVKuJiYnUQP1P9kcmesbYXuiPcojOFDBu0REkSiEdMk7CUOJoHE0SIh3ou+n3YP/UDJxcDSPgrGAOAiDmcTTiidDHBq5QSBVrQSvEKMhda7P6oRWek5C912Kms+iha4LOXOAQ1Jw/jE1DtlHZla1aKVJOFNlcTYIJa4cDQEbywu9jxFuNfECryYDn+BgFOYaR/Dbgj9xTBFTmZwOO0Qcy1aUdcHyIZwJ6xoPqzCH82cmJ5O9FKlaQ8WX9zcM93WozR1TdqBqDVCDb6S1RSzHblife76xK6rtzfxoYiVM5GnA3weFjvF9FsmVr/WuOCyM4eTxkO34QohiGIEmFSEfwLGzJS2wm6YFPsxK8Dvtw3PfLtsoqZsTaQW5uSqwV0w8iwfjJ2wYaT1/KVBngeyihlKXsW2m8S84rtUuNOleSWBLdH1jNkOmZi1pJJYtPW7MwuMKz1NOwLDQ/f2CStn9oALnkd+oZwcpu7G8aPjRN090x+MRx7TaqrKBq9+tCKqcaB4EaM576AP0X9AoF+w== x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: jPNixvjiWjgo8ou1iLAbx0pbR9iaJ05pbIyI+6f3iK9LjGybZJjHIPHu3stOfI0/QNxtRwVYwOrOK8SiC0OoomnVS6tiIvWkZqz5KrS41r+tZFbg+xNbD024oBzLTsjYIXvPpumIi8kVMBrhSOjDyFsGu0exfAJIIA+nyNu5ToliwsNZxXBcS6Q3TgkcQ9MOeEaGc6wIgBVI6x9FbZZ2OQ== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <4F0F1D7A60FFA44C938586DCD4392D48@namprd11.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b1f0f8ef-649a-4924-f6e8-08d7c67b2c41 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Mar 2020 11:47:42.0882 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: PQTUFBXWfri8WMgSVzG/wocfHEjEcdUF3xyzX7WToL7202u4geTblG3+hyuaFbOwSIWaohWmrvCZKrbX1nb5pw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR11MB1596 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.13, xch-aln-003.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-6.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 11:47:52 -0000 QWRhbSwNCg0K77u/QWJvdXQgeW91ciBwb2ludCBiZWxvdw0KDQogICAgIEFSPiAgR2l0SHViIGlz IGZyZWVseSBhY2Nlc3NpYmxlIG9uIHRoZSBvcGVuIEludGVybmV0LA0KICAgICAgIGFsYmVpdCBj dXJyZW50bHkgb25seSB2aWEgSVB2NC4NCiAgICANCiAgICBBUj4gT25lIHNpbmNlcmVseSBob3Bl cyB0aGF0IHRoaXMgc2Vjb25kIGNsYXVzZSB3aWxsIGFnZSBiYWRseS4gUGVyaGFwcyBxdWFsaWZ5 IGl0DQogICAgd2l0aCDigJxhdCB0aGUgdGltZSB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGlzIHB1Ymxpc2hlZC7i gJ0gQWx0ZXJuYXRlbHksIHJlbW92ZSB0aGUgY2xhdXNlLA0KICAgIGFzIGl0IGFkZHMgdmlydHVh bGx5IG5vdGhpbmcgdG8gdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KICAgIA0KSSBhZ3JlZSB3aXRoIHlvdXIgaG9w ZSBidXQgSSBzdHJvbmdseSBvYmplY3QgdG8gcmVtb3ZlIHNlbnRlbmNlLiBUaGlzIGlzIGFscmVh ZHkgYSBtYWpvciBpc3N1ZSB0aGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGICYgSUVTRyBhcmUgcHJvcG9zaW5nIGEgc2lu Z2xlIGNvbW1lcmNpYWwgc2VydmVyOyBidXQsIGF0IGxlYXN0IGxldCdzIHN0YXRlIHRoYXQgaXQg ZGV2aWF0ZXMgZnJvbSB0aGUgSUFCIHN0YXRlbWVudCBhYm91dCBJUHY2IFsxXSBzbyBsZXQncyBr ZWVwIHRoaXMgc2VudGVuY2Ugb2YgY291cnNlIHdpdGggYSB0aW1lc3RhbXAgYXMgeW91IHByb3Bv c2VkLg0KDQpSZWdhcmRzDQoNCi3DqXJpYw0KDQpbMV0gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWFiLm9yZy8yMDE2 LzExLzA3L2lhYi1zdGF0ZW1lbnQtb24taXB2Ni8NCg0KDQo= From nobody Thu Mar 12 05:28:25 2020 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 E2DC13A0F9A for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:28:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lCjkVHgfw0jR for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:28:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 AE6023A0F86 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:28:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CCSHrT026218 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:28:17 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id D77BF2059FB for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:28:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD11C2057AE for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:28:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.11.240.10] ([10.11.240.10]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CCSEaB027459 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:28:16 +0100 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158401082788.18076.104688218811852864@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <8cddb995-d3b2-bc6c-1706-30f9ff4933df@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:28:13 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <158401082788.18076.104688218811852864@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 12:28:23 -0000 Le 12/03/2020 à 12:00, Martin Vigoureux via Datatracker a écrit : > Martin Vigoureux has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hi, > > I share most of the concerns raised by my co-ADs. > > What I'd really like to see is some clarifications added such that it is clear > that these recommandations are not for all IETF WGs. There is a sentence which > aims at stating that: > The requirements here apply to the case where Working Groups decide > to use GitHub as a primary means of interaction. > But in fact before that one can also read: > The intent is to allow each Working Group ... > and after that: > Each Working Group SHOULD create ... > Each Working Group MAY ... > plus many occurrences of "Working Groups" (plural). > > To resolve the ambiguity may be you could do: > The intent is to allow a Working Group considerable flexibility in how it > uses GitHub. The Working Group SHOULD create its own new organisation. The > Working Group MAY ... > > And/or maybe reinforce the first sentence by clarifying that, in the rest of > the document, "Working Groups" refer to working groups which have decided to > use GitHub. I do not understand this. It is people who decide to use or not use github for their work in that WG. SOme people in the same WG use it, others dont. Because of that, maybe clarify that the recommendations written in this I-D are for Contributors to I-D in a a WG, not for WG chairs. (?) Other people dont work in WGs (independent track) and, among them, still some use github and others no. WG chairs can accept or not accept that the Contributors in a document use github or not. I do not know what can be recommended to WG Chairs about using or not using github. Maybe the Chairs use github to maintain the Charter text, if they so want. Maybe the Chairs use github to store the presentaiton material at a WG meeting. Maybe the Chairs request contributors to store the presentation material on github. Some people might be prohibited by employer's policy from creating an account on github. It is an assumptionn that I did see: the creator of a sharepoint repository assumed that people would prefer to use their company email address and not their other private address, which is typiccally used on github. Alex > > -m > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Thu Mar 12 05:37:35 2020 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 AC8C83A105B; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:37:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=QtXPYtvu; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=XC4Ij2n/ 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 x8PRj5q2RH92; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:37:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 111A63A10A6; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:37:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AC6E8A3; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:37:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:37:19 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=s zIjIiunypCaf0A8zIms4KvwKSTkM6s70ZBogCc1kfw=; b=QtXPYtvu3AnWkh3Sk Cdeoda0Wd10Y4hoZE8jyivoTsp+Lv6ahnyeioBuHQ860aHtUKYA25U7/cm8pqNzP VovdDIXOMQz3wdjW6MiC6B8x5A9BoPkQaEBxs7G3pRDM/q8rlf98oX1EzG2bqOWr dpwZL6g9Dmguo+PsBXu+hhXvnoj0JxlGctkG48BfUs4kWBcHtsDgPfjIhCHci7N2 PfMZfitI43SztJw+isfYvpMNDtK1eOlYK41N8L42uyZMWzVvE1qgJBmtXtBxrJLX TJalwqXMKdbhoomHL5ky7uuxibkVaLIqTEPsbQwl1SSVs49dFXU4DFMaLZ8MQSq1 8QSNg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=szIjIiunypCaf0A8zIms4KvwKSTkM6s70ZBogCc1k fw=; b=XC4Ij2n/z9+Ka6tM+UjsM7YwvEjMFHfI6UYDBFoJZvng8Svr9WPjaEk70 WVzuPFt3Hy3eiv7Gt/yfQYfDcL0vUBnBGxDZW3NhVtyJozNQ5oXtHmzzOA12nOqW 2yqFODB1Lgdx+x/uINTMGVYceffVMplUWFKO2zJBdsfls4m8rk//OwowfDssW2Rk YHKiO4hJcv80VB4W8WgZWIgpuI8XujDDyGnqAvmTP3Sxf6o9RcIlcgLDqxvy9Tjv FegSCtDFCugIhdWYvmkIk+MximWZf3yycmtU7zfpkhiwBWL16L6R6YUcNB6h4OdD mXXnqtAwmvlmC5OqfJgsDUhNXgA1g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvhedggeegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqh hmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhishhsrgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegt ohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhdpihgvthhfrd horhhgnecukfhppedujeefrdefkedruddujedrkeeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgep tdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghlihhsshgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.86]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id F379D328005A; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:37:17 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: <91791C0B-D5BC-4030-A1C2-C0409EA940AC@kuehlewind.net> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:37:17 -0400 Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, IESG , draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> <91791C0B-D5BC-4030-A1C2-C0409EA940AC@kuehlewind.net> To: Mirja Kuehlewind X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_an?= =?utf-8?q?d_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 12:37:31 -0000 Hi Mirja, > On Mar 10, 2020, at 9:00 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind = wrote: >=20 > Okay, thanks for clarifying this. However this status and intention is = not well reflected in the current text in the document and I think a = revision is needed to avoid confusion. It's not only the paragraph below = but also other parts, especially where it talks about options to ingrate = in the datatracker. Paul has made these changes: = https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/pull/= 16/files >=20 > Also if this document is meant document the practice as to be applied, = it should also be BCP and use normatively language. But then probably = most of the text in draft-ietf-git-using-github in section 2 (and some = of section 3) could be moved into this document because otherwise we = will end up having this specified normatively twice. The sentiment on draft-ietf-git-using-github seems to be leaning towards = informational, so I think it=E2=80=99s better to keep both of them = informational. Alissa >=20 > Mirja >=20 >=20 >> On 10. Mar 2020, at 13:55, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 8:51 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Hi Alissa, >>>=20 >>> This is not what the document says here (and also in the abstract): >>>=20 >>> " The document is meant to spur discussion in the IETF community. = If >>> there proves to be rough consensus in the community in support of = the >>> proposals in this document, the functional requirements would need = to >>> be discussed with the IETF Tools Team and the IETF Secretariat, who >>> would need to support various pieces of what is proposed herein.=E2=80= =9D >>>=20 >>> Or should this have been removed?=20 >>=20 >> Yes, sorry for not catching that. I think we can just remove this. >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Is the intention to let the secretariat provide these function on = publication? If so, we should probably request changes to the tool team = before publication=E2=80=A6? >>=20 >> Yep, the tools team is already working on this and the secretariat is = aware. >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Alissa >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Maybe it is more appropriate to not discuss the tooling issue and = concrete datatracker change in the RFC-to-be but only document the = process as to be performed by the chairs and secretariat? >>>=20 >>> Mirja >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On 10. Mar 2020, at 13:34, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Hi Mirja, >>>>=20 >>>>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 6:30 AM, Mirja K=C3=BChlewind via Datatracker = wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> Mirja K=C3=BChlewind has entered the following ballot position for >>>>> draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: Discuss >>>>>=20 >>>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to = all >>>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this >>>>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >>>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found = here: >>>>> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> DISCUSS: >>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>=20 >>>>> To be honest I don't fully understand the point of this document. = It seem like >>>>> this document is supposed to be the basis for more discussion, = however, I >>>>> thought that's what we have the wg for. So when and how do we come = to a final >>>>> decision if we want to implement the proposed changes? >>>>=20 >>>> This document specifies the administrative processes and = conventions we will use. Further discussion of the changes (other than = minor tweaks here and there) is not expected. >>>>=20 >>>> Best, >>>> Alissa=20 >>>>=20 >>>>> And what would we do in >>>>> that case - take this document and republish? Why can't we make = the decision >>>>> first and then publish something? In short, I think it would be = important that >>>>> the document also describes what the next steps are and the = triggers to move on! >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> COMMENT: >>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>=20 >>>>> Other questions/comments: >>>>>=20 >>>>> 1) Sec 2.3: >>>>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were = personnel changes." >>>>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this = sentence really >>>>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or = GitHub) and >>>>> what is should do? >>>>>=20 >>>>> 2) Sec 2.5: >>>>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" >>>>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be = maintained within >>>>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or = desirable: >>>>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There >>>>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >>>>>=20 >>>>> 3) Also sec 2.5: >>>>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a >>>>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of = an >>>>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new >>>>> repository within that organization for a single document." >>>>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit = it to the >>>>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does = not seems >>>>> too useful... >>>>>=20 >>>>> 4) Sec 2.6: >>>>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." >>>>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you = can add link to >>>>> external pages? >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 From nobody Thu Mar 12 05:40:31 2020 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 0344D3A0FF1; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:40:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=XrT8yV7q; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=tmn0Kerz 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 LFqvp69RGiQu; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4028F3A0FE4; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:40:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 388AC8B9; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:40:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:40:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=G 9LzgTf6ZoRHeIgaiSz1jL+XoMSTfKJiLnitBjjqBgg=; b=XrT8yV7qLSjqyhK0d PLVdhsoxsgWQ4o6drUg33gy+v3XnFWne/Z2o3COVFj3sbL/Pl5YOOiYDQkFQGMOe Z0uUN0m32gV52+VNyXJi2l4gKTZBOJDjTir+YipPpES51f9/a/dKMv5bLsBDC9Ak /lmhHsRX2ctHA3htlmgpwttvxZrbmsto0lCrtwAR1w7eqLNOhIBfgWOolGdUQp28 yquGDAABWebEgpivSGS0u34jzC5s4GhUBAQTscmZTsan2ScFiUCptq5R8Pru/0BG 1SiRo8/1mkbfItsKoJPTVY2QOUSg+dIl907Tl6h40+/e+MqkZmo4H07A5ZJ3aY/D Z/yuQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=G9LzgTf6ZoRHeIgaiSz1jL+XoMSTfKJiLnitBjjqB gg=; b=tmn0KerzhVjnJvOVRFjj+2ZDysZBC07+1psoiF8KRWrPFmF48qENT+go8 u0M+XQFzOf8QpjHASBBfAgkyZvQtxwmW/JJPY5mHEMNCnHAAqnHZFI6hEbD6rLbh MhhyjYfdymrgn0hLrLXB/whAKsq2P1zuVJ1pmalCbfQKZP8zdYnJ1gMvxZvHIUFw 08Tj0uquiVx58oGtlkF0fUwE7pj6AZeEsvlNYH9YBFjWOTMxOEWH7T6MIa/aMGq2 7TYriZr2pb8tPF2lfRW5T+fu4NXn0v/hR8TYieyJFRpo36SJy3rm8oulB4ZYeRg5 MNsr+auAL/QAiIf0ceHMljnl+9g1A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvhedggeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtjeenucfhrhhomheptehlihhs shgrucevohhophgvrhcuoegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhnqeenucffohhmrg hinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecukfhppedujeefrdefkedruddujedrkeeinecuvehluhhs thgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghlihhsshgrsegtoh hophgvrhifrdhinh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.86]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 421CC3280063; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:40:23 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:40:23 -0400 Cc: Brian E Carpenter , IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> To: Alvaro Retana X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 12:40:29 -0000 I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian suggested it so = I added the note. I=E2=80=99m happy to remove the note if necessary.=20 Alissa > On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana = wrote: >=20 > On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >=20 >=20 > Brian: >=20 > Hi! >=20 >=20 >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> DISCUSS: >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>=20 >>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this = document as a >>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF = community. >>>=20 >>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >>>=20 >>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet = Standards >>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether = working >>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support = their >>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. >>>=20 >>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working = Group >>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it = represents >>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision "to = use >>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their = discretion.." >>=20 >> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction = help? >=20 > It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having this > document be part of BCP 25. >=20 >=20 >=20 > .... >>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this = document >>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be = part of >>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to = discuss >>> this topic. >>=20 >> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP = number?) was >> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with a = bit of >> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community = discussion, of >> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). >=20 > No, I don't think things have changed. In this case, the AD added a > note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to BCP > 25 at the time of publication." >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ >=20 >=20 > However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies > directly to WG operation. The intention of adding documents to it > should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. >=20 >=20 > Thanks! >=20 > Alvaro. >=20 From nobody Thu Mar 12 05:41:04 2020 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 EB8723A0FF0; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:41:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 Gy27x5Mn5_mQ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:41:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 8E74E3A1009; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122330.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02CCWP8B031686; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:40:55 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=uJB6dw0E0IN3CYvzcnuJBSCNmvjBcBy3me2JpoI43QE=; b=MikpDwrTTfKPnAOP4SsozQ5o0FwOhMMlL4jW6ro9o2lZAvl+Tq8fR2DbJWsf8CPZF8GP 6gBv7eDjAtxZ6j07HeBGjFylGX2Vp5csaPbUzgeCMLSDhsjw3d5gy4XpyDnenCyAP15A ou/rYNtqdGyltF18trEFQHbKjFhMoaGxv0w3ewMd1Z9PeHh5GflWw6y+2ZoIc2advgPG eYFfE/ZWWofyExtw3E3bfIClMvw3Qj7yLtrhYAo57kRuJa2nEvMCVZY3/MP6D0OKtxCv DUIJKbLzCu0OAQk0QzJq7ZHTO0MZ+Nf18KX2xLmOwsh5WeiZjTCrKOgAnAd3DIgE7Ufe Tg== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint6 (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [184.51.33.61] (may be forged)) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ynqq6d05v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:40:55 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02CCWTC7030329; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:40:54 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.31]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ym7ty4e5n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:40:54 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:40:53 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:40:53 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Eric Rescorla , Mark Nottingham CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , The IESG , Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV+AS4DxDi0GjVfEiVSVvfcYiOXahEXQ+AgACJ1QA= Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:40:53 +0000 Message-ID: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.113.26] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_EFDE8EA2B7714AB48B65567F056F48F4akamaicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-12_04:2020-03-11, 2020-03-12 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=836 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002050000 definitions=main-2003120068 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-12_03:2020-03-11, 2020-03-12 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=804 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2003120068 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 12:41:04 -0000 --_000_EFDE8EA2B7714AB48B65567F056F48F4akamaicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 ICAqICAgSSBhZ3JlZSB3aXRoIE1hcnRpbiBoZXJlOiB0aGUgcG9pbnQgb2YgaGF2aW5nIHRoaXMg Z28gdGhyb3VnaCBhIFdHIGFuZCBjb25zZW5zdXMgaXMgdGhhdCB3ZSB0aGluayB0aGF0IGlmIHlv dSBhcmUgdXNpbmcgR2l0aHViIHRoaXMgaXMgYSBnb29kIHNldCBvZiBwcmFjdGljZXMgYW5kIHRo YXQgd2UgcmVjb21tZW5kIHRoZW0gaW4gdGhhdCBjYXNlLiBTbyB3aGlsZSBpdCdzIGF0IHRoZWly IGRpc2NyZXRpb24gdGhhdCBkb2Vzbid0IG1lYW4gd2UgZG9uJ3QgaGF2ZSBhbiBvcGluaW9uLg0K DQpUaGVyZSB3ZXJlIGFsc28gcmVhbCBjb25jcmV0ZSBpbXByb3ZlbWVudHMgdGhhdCBjYW1lIGFi b3V0IGJlY2F1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIFdHIHByb2Nlc3MuICBUaGUgbW9zdCBub3RhYmxlIGV4YW1wbGUg aXMgdGhlIOKAnGxpZ2h0IHdlaWdodOKAnSBtb2RlLCB0aGF0IGN1bG1pbmF0ZWQgaW4gQmFyYmFy YSBiZWluZyBhZGRlZCBhcyBjby1hdXRob3IuICBObyBhbW91bnQgb2YgcHJlc2VudGF0aW9ucyBh dCB0aGUgd2djaGFpcnMgbHVuY2ggY291bGQgaGF2ZSBhY2hpZXZlZCB0aGF0Lg0K --_000_EFDE8EA2B7714AB48B65567F056F48F4akamaicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <1B03A1282551024A907C2ED139735108@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6bz0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6b2ZmaWNlIiB4 bWxuczp3PSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTp3b3JkIiB4bWxuczptPSJo dHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL29mZmljZS8yMDA0LzEyL29tbWwiIHhtbG5zPSJo dHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy9UUi9SRUMtaHRtbDQwIj4NCjxoZWFkPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVp dj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KPG1l dGEgbmFtZT0iR2VuZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCAxNSAoZmlsdGVyZWQg bWVkaXVtKSI+DQo8c3R5bGU+PCEtLQ0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGZvbnQtZmFj ZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6NSAwIDAgMCAwIDAgMCAwIDAg MDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYW1icmlhIE1hdGgiOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0x OjIgNCA1IDMgNSA0IDYgMyAyIDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJp Ow0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgMTUgNSAyIDIgMiA0IDMgMiA0O30NCi8qIFN0eWxlIERlZmluaXRpb25z ICovDQpwLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgbGkuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBkaXYuTXNvTm9ybWFsDQoJe21hcmdpbjow aW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7fQ0KcC5Nc29MaXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoLCBsaS5Nc29M aXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoLCBkaXYuTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6 MzQ7DQoJbWFyZ2luLXRvcDowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLXJpZ2h0OjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t OjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tbGVmdDouNWluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmO30NCnNwYW4u RW1haWxTdHlsZTE4DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOnBlcnNvbmFsLXJlcGx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmOw0KCWNvbG9yOndpbmRvd3RleHQ7fQ0KLk1zb0NocERl ZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9ubHk7DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDt9 DQpAcGFnZSBXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7c2l6ZTo4LjVpbiAxMS4waW47DQoJbWFyZ2luOjEuMGlu IDEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluO30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2VjdGlv bjE7fQ0KLyogTGlzdCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGxpc3QgbDANCgl7bXNvLWxpc3QtaWQ6MTI5 ODYwODIzMDsNCgltc28tbGlzdC10eXBlOmh5YnJpZDsNCgltc28tbGlzdC10ZW1wbGF0ZS1pZHM6 MTk5MTY3MzE1MCAxMTU1MDM5NDQ4IDY3Njk4NjkxIDY3Njk4NjkzIDY3Njk4Njg5IDY3Njk4Njkx IDY3Njk4NjkzIDY3Njk4Njg5IDY3Njk4NjkxIDY3Njk4NjkzO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsMQ0K CXttc28tbGV2ZWwtc3RhcnQtYXQ6MDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7 DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674OYOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1s ZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJbXNvLWFu c2ktZm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7DQoJbXNvLWZhcmVh c3QtZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IlRpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbiI7DQoJbXNvLWJpZGktZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 Q2FsaWJyaTsNCgltc28tYW5zaS1mb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsMg0K CXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6bzsNCglt c28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7 DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDb3VyaWVyIE5ldyI7fQ0KQGxp c3QgbDA6bGV2ZWwzDQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2 ZWwtdGV4dDrvgqc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJl ci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5n ZGluZ3M7DQoJbXNvLWJpZGktZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVs NA0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674K3 Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246 bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6U3ltYm9sOw0KCW1zby1i aWRpLWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlN5bWJvbDt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDUNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51 bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Om87DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1z dG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50 Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ291cmllciBOZXciO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNg0K CXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674KnOw0K CW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVm dDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzOw0KCW1zby1i aWRpLWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OldpbmdkaW5nczt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDcNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVs LW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Ou+CtzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwt dGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1p bmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlN5bWJvbDsNCgltc28tYmlkaS1mb250LWZhbWls eTpTeW1ib2w7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw4DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1 bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDpvOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1z by1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6IkNvdXJpZXIgTmV3Ijt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDkNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51 bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Ou+CpzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFi LXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRl bnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OldpbmdkaW5nczsNCgltc28tYmlkaS1mb250LWZhbWls eTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7fQ0Kb2wNCgl7bWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTowaW47fQ0KdWwNCgl7bWFyZ2luLWJv dHRvbTowaW47fQ0KLS0+PC9zdHlsZT4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBsaW5r PSJibHVlIiB2bGluaz0icHVycGxlIj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMSI+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8dWwgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi10b3A6MGluIiB0eXBlPSJkaXNjIj4N CjxsaSBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjBpbjttc28t bGlzdDpsMCBsZXZlbDEgbGZvMSI+SSBhZ3JlZSB3aXRoIE1hcnRpbiBoZXJlOiB0aGUgcG9pbnQg b2YgaGF2aW5nIHRoaXMgZ28gdGhyb3VnaCBhIFdHIGFuZCBjb25zZW5zdXMgaXMgdGhhdCB3ZSB0 aGluayB0aGF0IGlmIHlvdSBhcmUgdXNpbmcgR2l0aHViIHRoaXMgaXMgYSBnb29kIHNldCBvZiBw cmFjdGljZXMgYW5kIHRoYXQgd2UgcmVjb21tZW5kDQogdGhlbSBpbiB0aGF0IGNhc2UuIFNvIHdo aWxlIGl0J3MgYXQgdGhlaXIgZGlzY3JldGlvbiB0aGF0IGRvZXNuJ3QgbWVhbiB3ZSBkb24ndCBo YXZlIGFuIG9waW5pb24uPG86cD48L286cD48L2xpPjwvdWw+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPlRoZXJlIHdlcmUg YWxzbyByZWFsIGNvbmNyZXRlIGltcHJvdmVtZW50cyB0aGF0IGNhbWUgYWJvdXQgYmVjYXVzZSBv ZiB0aGUgV0cgcHJvY2Vzcy4mbmJzcDsgVGhlIG1vc3Qgbm90YWJsZSBleGFtcGxlIGlzIHRoZSDi gJxsaWdodCB3ZWlnaHTigJ0gbW9kZSwgdGhhdCBjdWxtaW5hdGVkIGluIEJhcmJhcmEgYmVpbmcg YWRkZWQgYXMgY28tYXV0aG9yLiZuYnNwOyBObyBhbW91bnQgb2YgcHJlc2VudGF0aW9ucyBhdCB0 aGUgd2djaGFpcnMNCiBsdW5jaCBjb3VsZCBoYXZlIGFjaGlldmVkIHRoYXQuPG86cD48L286cD48 L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_EFDE8EA2B7714AB48B65567F056F48F4akamaicom_-- From nobody Thu Mar 12 05:48:12 2020 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 44A463A003B; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:48:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 WRY8opfOY4jR; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:47:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (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 6EE523A0036; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 05:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p200300dee7239a00e03fd05ee624250d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e723:9a00:e03f:d05e:e624:250d]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1jCNFg-00078m-UX; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:47:52 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) From: Mirja Kuehlewind In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:47:51 +0100 Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, IESG , draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> <91791C0B-D5BC-4030-A1C2-C0409EA940AC@kuehlewind.net> To: Alissa Cooper X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1584017278;dc58996d; X-HE-SMSGID: 1jCNFg-00078m-UX Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_an?= =?utf-8?q?d_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 12:48:02 -0000 Hi Alissa, hi Paul > On 12. Mar 2020, at 13:37, Alissa Cooper wrote: >=20 > Hi Mirja, >=20 >> On Mar 10, 2020, at 9:00 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind = wrote: >>=20 >> Okay, thanks for clarifying this. However this status and intention = is not well reflected in the current text in the document and I think a = revision is needed to avoid confusion. It's not only the paragraph below = but also other parts, especially where it talks about options to ingrate = in the datatracker. >=20 > Paul has made these changes: = https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/pull/= 16/files Thanks for this change but I think there would be more. First I suggest = to also remove the pointer in the abstract for list discussion (but I = guess that could also be done by the RFC editor but as you do edits = anyway). But then there are also more things that could be clarified, = e.g.sentences like "This document proposes that there be a facility in the IETF = Datatracker=E2=80=A6 " Sentences like this makes it difficult to understand what this document = actually only =E2=80=9Cproposes=E2=80=9D and what=E2=80=99s the process = that is specified that will be applied in future. As I said earlier, = tying this documents and its procedures too close to what is offered in = the datatracker makes it unclear. Maybe you can sepcify the processes = (normatively) first without relating it to any interface or function in = the datatracker and then later have a section to described that would be = needed in the datatracker to support this process (maybe even in the = appendix) or even better wait until the datatracker changes are = implemented and then publish this document (because that will age much = better). >=20 >>=20 >> Also if this document is meant document the practice as to be = applied, it should also be BCP and use normatively language. But then = probably most of the text in draft-ietf-git-using-github in section 2 = (and some of section 3) could be moved into this document because = otherwise we will end up having this specified normatively twice. >=20 > The sentiment on draft-ietf-git-using-github seems to be leaning = towards informational, so I think it=E2=80=99s better to keep both of = them informational. draft-ietf-git-using-github is BCP. And it has a lot of normative text = in it (mainly section 2 and some parts in 3 as well) that is fully = redundant with content of this draft. Mirja >=20 > Alissa >=20 >>=20 >> Mirja >>=20 >>=20 >>> On 10. Mar 2020, at 13:55, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 8:51 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Hi Alissa, >>>>=20 >>>> This is not what the document says here (and also in the abstract): >>>>=20 >>>> " The document is meant to spur discussion in the IETF community. = If >>>> there proves to be rough consensus in the community in support of = the >>>> proposals in this document, the functional requirements would need = to >>>> be discussed with the IETF Tools Team and the IETF Secretariat, who >>>> would need to support various pieces of what is proposed herein.=E2=80= =9D >>>>=20 >>>> Or should this have been removed?=20 >>>=20 >>> Yes, sorry for not catching that. I think we can just remove this. >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Is the intention to let the secretariat provide these function on = publication? If so, we should probably request changes to the tool team = before publication=E2=80=A6? >>>=20 >>> Yep, the tools team is already working on this and the secretariat = is aware. >>>=20 >>> Thanks, >>> Alissa >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Maybe it is more appropriate to not discuss the tooling issue and = concrete datatracker change in the RFC-to-be but only document the = process as to be performed by the chairs and secretariat? >>>>=20 >>>> Mirja >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>> On 10. Mar 2020, at 13:34, Alissa Cooper = wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> Hi Mirja, >>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Mar 10, 2020, at 6:30 AM, Mirja K=C3=BChlewind via Datatracker = wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Mirja K=C3=BChlewind has entered the following ballot position = for >>>>>> draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: Discuss >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to = all >>>>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to = cut this >>>>>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >>>>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found = here: >>>>>> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> DISCUSS: >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> To be honest I don't fully understand the point of this document. = It seem like >>>>>> this document is supposed to be the basis for more discussion, = however, I >>>>>> thought that's what we have the wg for. So when and how do we = come to a final >>>>>> decision if we want to implement the proposed changes? >>>>>=20 >>>>> This document specifies the administrative processes and = conventions we will use. Further discussion of the changes (other than = minor tweaks here and there) is not expected. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Best, >>>>> Alissa=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>> And what would we do in >>>>>> that case - take this document and republish? Why can't we make = the decision >>>>>> first and then publish something? In short, I think it would be = important that >>>>>> the document also describes what the next steps are and the = triggers to move on! >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> COMMENT: >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Other questions/comments: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 1) Sec 2.3: >>>>>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were = personnel changes." >>>>>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this = sentence really >>>>>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker = or GitHub) and >>>>>> what is should do? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 2) Sec 2.5: >>>>>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" >>>>>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be = maintained within >>>>>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical = or desirable: >>>>>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There >>>>>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 3) Also sec 2.5: >>>>>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be = a >>>>>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator = of an >>>>>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new >>>>>> repository within that organization for a single document." >>>>>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit = it to the >>>>>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft = does not seems >>>>>> too useful... >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 4) Sec 2.6: >>>>>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." >>>>>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you = can add link to >>>>>> external pages? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 From nobody Thu Mar 12 06:29:45 2020 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 3DE5F3A082F; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:29:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Suresh Krishnan Message-ID: <158401978403.18064.15276557820894584214@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:29:44 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 13:29:44 -0000 Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- * Section 2.5: If there is an expectation that datatracker is expected to drive the creation of the document repositories on github and to provide access to authors/editors (as this section implies) I think there is a need for identity mapping for authors/editors similar to what is specified in Section 2.1 ("Steps 3 and 4 above imply that the GitHub identities of the organization owners and administrators are known." related to ticket 2548). From nobody Thu Mar 12 06:30:04 2020 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 A1E563A085E; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:29:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.120.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Suresh Krishnan Message-ID: <158401979264.18068.9716500170360894296@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:29:52 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 13:29:53 -0000 Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for writing up this document. I believe it provides good advice for WG chairs to use github in their workflow. I also have concerns about centralization and the lack of IPv6, but I also see the other side of the argument that the community (specifically the non-IETF collaborators) is what makes github more useful than self-hosting or other alternatives. Pretty much everything I wanted to comment has been brought up by my co-ADs and hence I am content to watch their resolutions. There is only one thing I would like to propose. In Section 6 regarding I-D publication it would be good if there is a recommendation (for chairs/editors) to summarize the issues addressed by the revision especially for the benefit of the WG participants who don't use github. From nobody Thu Mar 12 06:49:38 2020 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 4D9023A08B6; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:49:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 u8WMNZv7_yiW; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:49:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (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 E21873A0887; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 06:49:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p200300dee7239a00e03fd05ee624250d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e723:9a00:e03f:d05e:e624:250d]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1jCODK-0005Qg-7f; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:49:30 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) From: Mirja Kuehlewind In-Reply-To: <35046BE2-7120-492F-AE1C-DA74FA1AA2C8@icann.org> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:49:29 +0100 Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , IESG Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> <35046BE2-7120-492F-AE1C-DA74FA1AA2C8@icann.org> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1584020974;5e59c6e2; X-HE-SMSGID: 1jCODK-0005Qg-7f Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?b?W0V4dF0gTWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZCdzIERp?= =?utf-8?q?scuss_on_draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_D?= =?utf-8?q?ISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 13:49:36 -0000 Hi Paul, See inline. > On 11. Mar 2020, at 21:36, Paul Hoffman = wrote: >=20 > Catching up on the rest of Mirja's comments (not already discussed on = this thread) >=20 >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> COMMENT: >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>=20 >>>> Other questions/comments: >>>>=20 >>>> 1) Sec 2.3: >>>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personnel = changes." >>>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this = sentence really >>>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or = GitHub) and >>>> what is should do? >=20 > We will change "API" to "ability in the Datatracker=E2=80=9D. I=E2=80=99m still not sure what exactly is needed here? Can you maybe = explain what the idea is? >=20 >>>>=20 >>>> 2) Sec 2.5: >>>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" >>>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be = maintained within >>>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or = desirable: >>>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There >>>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >=20 > Some chairs have indicated it is desirable, so the WG thought it = should be possible. Yes, I think this is a discussion for the other git draft. >=20 >>>>=20 >>>> 3) Also sec 2.5: >>>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a >>>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of = an >>>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new >>>> repository within that organization for a single document." >>>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit = it to the >>>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does = not seems >>>> too useful... >=20 > Document authors can tell the WG chairs that they intend to create a = new WG draft. If that happens, the WG chair creates the repo with either = the intended draft name or something semantically relevant, and tells = the document authors before they turn in the -00. (I think this has = already happened in some WGs=E2=80=A6) That's fine. But the cited text talks about a datatracker interface for = that. Not sure if that is the right approach. >=20 >>>>=20 >>>> 4) Sec 2.6: >>>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." >>>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you can = add link to >>>> external pages? >=20 > This is currently true for chairs for their WGs, but not for authors = in their document page. It was not clear to me that this was intended on the document level. I = think that should be clarified. How would that look like? Authors can = add a GitHub repo name or just any URL? Not sure if authors should do = that or only chairs on a per-document basis; might be different for = individual drafts and wg documents. Thanks! Mirja >=20 > --Paul Hoffman From nobody Thu Mar 12 07:16:50 2020 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 06C973A0A02; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:16:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=GoTV+VCT; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=MwphG9fy 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 VYp00L69o-6j; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:16:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B66F3A0A01; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:16:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2B3F3DB; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:16:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:16:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=h GsPu+9nQAa4pQ7ZgDHHnvAEWCbg+kq0ROgCjJW2vCg=; b=GoTV+VCTh8yL98sLW be8mA+QUO0bb9xy2hGu0+tqldw/RyswzbKSfywQfzvdFqH5cRKoiWQBIU4IC/eT0 tBqNiMoivhX//D/KAdfnQcXAWJ5DLBImQbE7mr730kFRmDzn2pxdOonu3tbsEPcd UHXUlut6dgG0cTIftmcp12G2SjpKQ5H6R8VeeBzDS+6UWhUxDsGfVSCYS/OpHDjQ 1mgA4FMf9reR9pSqPIovON7/i5TnQgruNYFeqT6MWwLFkihdgttMEXSlLWkdFbEo c2saKF0crnduclkooM3ySfaFtvhqn4B1HkHoHSyD1uwj+sTmpR/qg+P9jY5qChER 8Jc+A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=hGsPu+9nQAa4pQ7ZgDHHnvAEWCbg+kq0ROgCjJW2v Cg=; b=MwphG9fyA3rQtgEQfXA7YWw2CkmDKCQWvq7ISgMqi1kcXoItaAtCeIFlU /5YCMCpWcaZHqmWey1O9Ti0ls3yE+ZF8su4hR6u/8X+yryocBb6YGPOgapuEeUt0 5pnpAMCPIpkfyqh/MxFl8Et8uPPUr8LZt/mawU4EQISIbEWXMu/whuLnYhy3JwHO LxoR5EfN/fYBTS//JTsWw4hmCOMwife8gV4PnxSTqr6wUOoCB9y6+OjZZ3MzXyT3 HBSabTzDQOr/by1+7jZKRQ0J57OcjGA+/W2O7sdJHip0wxUHx5pjOvkdi41/CmNW 6yZC6wy+r6MJrlcA+bQXkvnv1ypuw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvhedgieegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqh hmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhishhsrgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegt ohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepudejfe drfeekrdduudejrdekieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgr ihhlfhhrohhmpegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhn X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.86]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C873A3061363; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:16:29 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:16:29 -0400 Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , IESG , Alvaro Retana Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 14:16:42 -0000 WG: Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I said I = would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if no one from = the WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP number when it = is published. Alissa > On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote: >=20 > I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian suggested it = so I added the note. I=E2=80=99m happy to remove the note if necessary.=20= >=20 > Alissa >=20 >=20 >> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana = wrote: >>=20 >> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> Brian: >>=20 >> Hi! >>=20 >>=20 >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> DISCUSS: >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>=20 >>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this = document as a >>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF = community. >>>>=20 >>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >>>>=20 >>>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet = Standards >>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether = working >>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support = their >>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. >>>>=20 >>>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working = Group >>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it = represents >>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision = "to use >>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their = discretion.." >>>=20 >>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction = help? >>=20 >> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having this >> document be part of BCP 25. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> .... >>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this = document >>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be = part of >>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to = discuss >>>> this topic. >>>=20 >>> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP = number?) was >>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with a = bit of >>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community = discussion, of >>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). >>=20 >> No, I don't think things have changed. In this case, the AD added a >> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to = BCP >> 25 at the time of publication." >>=20 >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ >>=20 >>=20 >> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies >> directly to WG operation. The intention of adding documents to it >> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. >>=20 >>=20 >> Thanks! >>=20 >> Alvaro. >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Thu Mar 12 07:23:48 2020 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 BC0103A0A11 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:23:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UM1Pn-Co5DfK for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 045B63A0A02 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:23:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CENfXp021690 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:23:41 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id D6AD8205CBC for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:23:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA21201E75 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:23:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.11.240.10] ([10.11.240.10]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CENfvG022357 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:23:41 +0100 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <976d4e5c-a18a-d224-bcf4-567cfc59ea65@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:23:41 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 14:23:47 -0000 Hi, I do not understand - will this become a BCP even though github is IPv4-only? I am asking, because if it is so, then I think I disagree. Alex Le 12/03/2020 à 15:16, Alissa Cooper a écrit : > WG: > > Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I said I would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if no one from the WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP number when it is published. > > Alissa > > >> On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote: >> >> I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian suggested it so I added the note. I’m happy to remove the note if necessary. >> >> Alissa >> >> >>> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana wrote: >>> >>> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>> >>> >>> Brian: >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> DISCUSS: >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this document as a >>>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF community. >>>>> >>>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >>>>> >>>>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Standards >>>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether working >>>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their >>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. >>>>> >>>>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working Group >>>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it represents >>>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision "to use >>>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their discretion.." >>>> >>>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction help? >>> >>> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having this >>> document be part of BCP 25. >>> >>> >>> >>> .... >>>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this document >>>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be part of >>>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to discuss >>>>> this topic. >>>> >>>> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP number?) was >>>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with a bit of >>>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community discussion, of >>>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). >>> >>> No, I don't think things have changed. In this case, the AD added a >>> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to BCP >>> 25 at the time of publication." >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ >>> >>> >>> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies >>> directly to WG operation. The intention of adding documents to it >>> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. >>> >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Alvaro. >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Thu Mar 12 07:30:11 2020 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 C55E33A0A24; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:30:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HSo-iy5cy6f7; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:30:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 CF8FE3A0A20; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:29:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CETXpF001915; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:29:33 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F192207D3B; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:29:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2B4205649; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:29:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.11.240.10] ([10.11.240.10]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CETWs4026458; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:29:32 +0100 To: Mirja Kuehlewind Cc: Paul Hoffman , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , IESG References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> <35046BE2-7120-492F-AE1C-DA74FA1AA2C8@icann.org> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <20125f8e-2cae-fce5-9837-3c36d0c08c71@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:29:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?b?W0V4dF0gTWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZCdzIERp?= =?utf-8?q?scuss_on_draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_D?= =?utf-8?q?ISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 14:30:05 -0000 Hi, Please allow me to insert a comment. Le 12/03/2020 à 14:49, Mirja Kuehlewind a écrit : > Hi Paul, > > See inline. > >> On 11. Mar 2020, at 21:36, Paul Hoffman >> wrote: >> >> Catching up on the rest of Mirja's comments (not already discussed >> on this thread) >> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> COMMENT: >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Other questions/comments: >>>>> >>>>> 1) Sec 2.3: "There should likely be an API to specify that >>>>> there were personnel changes." Inline with the comment in the >>>>> shepherd write-up, I find this sentence really unclear. I'm >>>>> not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or GitHub) >>>>> and what is should do? >> >> We will change "API" to "ability in the Datatracker”. > > I’m still not sure what exactly is needed here? Can you maybe explain > what the idea is? I wonder the same thing, and I would like to know? From my side, as an user of github and xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org I often need less independent disconnected tools, or more interconnected tools that present a unique entry point to me. I would have liked, for example, a button called 'Compile' and a button called 'Submit to IETF' on the github GUI for an xml source. That could be achieved if there were a tight interface (an API maybe) between github.com and xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org. If we talk about a github.tools.ietf.org website, then there would still be a need of an interface between github and xml2rfc, and it might be easier to realize than if it were on github.com. In that latter case, if that interface is on IPv6, then it would be fine. But these are my thoughts. I do wonder about the answer to the question you raised. Alex > >> >>>>> >>>>> 2) Sec 2.5: "Creating a new repository for an individual >>>>> draft" This section indicated that also individual drafts >>>>> could be maintained within the official wg organization. I'm >>>>> not sure if that is practical or desirable: Which individual >>>>> docs should the chairs allow repos for and which not? There >>>>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >> >> Some chairs have indicated it is desirable, so the WG thought it >> should be possible. > > Yes, I think this is a discussion for the other git draft. > >> >>>>> >>>>> 3) Also sec 2.5: " As an incremental step, this document >>>>> proposes that there be a facility in the Datatracker >>>>> interface to allow an administrator of an ietf-wg- >>>>> organization to request the creation of a new repository >>>>> within that organization for a single document." For -00 >>>>> version you usually want to have a repo before you submit it >>>>> to the datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of >>>>> the draft does not seems too useful... >> >> Document authors can tell the WG chairs that they intend to create >> a new WG draft. If that happens, the WG chair creates the repo with >> either the intended draft name or something semantically relevant, >> and tells the document authors before they turn in the -00. (I >> think this has already happened in some WGs…) > > That's fine. But the cited text talks about a datatracker interface > for that. Not sure if that is the right approach. > >> >>>>> >>>>> 4) Sec 2.6: "At the time of this writing this feature was >>>>> under development." Wasn't there always/for a long time >>>>> already a feature where you can add link to external pages? >> >> This is currently true for chairs for their WGs, but not for >> authors in their document page. > > It was not clear to me that this was intended on the document level. > I think that should be clarified. How would that look like? Authors > can add a GitHub repo name or just any URL? Not sure if authors > should do that or only chairs on a per-document basis; might be > different for individual drafts and wg documents. > > Thanks! Mirja > > > >> >> --Paul Hoffman > > _______________________________________________ Ietf-and-github > mailing list Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Thu Mar 12 07:48:44 2020 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 9EBAB3A0A7E; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:48:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=isoc.org 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 q5rsqBUDV4zn; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAM04-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr690082.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.69.82]) (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 39CE73A0A52; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:48:30 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=iNRZPOK0a8syDT4ZZS9sx3FHzW234H4NFyi67Ad+aWByQlh8/SiMx2gq9srv9w6IxLL5wEcdgcRQkMGkdoQ7nk7RJ8etk5QGeHbd0L03tQThwkW88p9gu79OQHTXKtVyS6nXlFakazzmnmyKouYouNbl6UWRqLjmp0Mcsu97MLB25oALBpHjFG0P6q6f6T7uzBXzuXdKiXveL+2XkOB2c8fO/AlgZW6oODpxoVlv5lMaj0KBlxpoxh+c5sk/EWFbjLTY0F9HgBL+N/Yzx6hwBMOTlgvk+woIeIHAR1HlI55fmuL0d9avM73RmSInA9+6ggBWp9UzTeGg7KuDh4nhtw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=IjQYE31XDMVV6ZXF6fKyVYJDf+So7NXXxS6v1avAKpw=; b=EA7YLJ+D5l+UJxfzTINyi7BR2/CnLDELwMeFGRXtoBKlDz3cc2DDVfwAHFlb85ZVLS4tzdEyVYRtkoLTh8EfvXvnrVhhVORf/67+c9ake+aviUdrta/VUmXrEz8Q5pzb1tW3o8febSh/q2n99RfeCNQjL4v4gbkcs3iwzro/Xz/pvcdTy0r7YAoKakSW0URsOYr/iCxMjKyweGiNaSNlWkYHs8HUDu+8Pz898RZhPM1j8ZJbG7xJtelKKYkWtSqIzC6h2zNEW4zma8Eb3P4cSk8bPXOxJgw+LJyZnN/YBgjTA3AFB6yTbWe7oMT1xz6dW1oOMLNudUq7Gq85NNvceQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=isoc.org; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=isoc.org; dkim=pass header.d=isoc.org; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.org; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=IjQYE31XDMVV6ZXF6fKyVYJDf+So7NXXxS6v1avAKpw=; b=Ke6c/CtfEF+qm6LoAZj0Z7OdbGubTEK5UwyUq5CtBMUneOG6oPpe974Q7dT+bYsQwAJY+Lh/6rR2iL7LGC+zl2ELngQhTNV4ivI4Hb9wgkr8T41ZlI9vdU6N5cBdQYv8bTeZz+kJTFIdXvu3CS4vEdbd59EBmxC4x4p4cmYt09E= Received: from BL0PR06MB4530.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:5a::16) by BL0PR06MB4529.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:55::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.17; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:48:28 +0000 Received: from BL0PR06MB4530.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3855:447b:b620:b20c]) by BL0PR06MB4530.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3855:447b:b620:b20c%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.018; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:48:27 +0000 From: Dan York To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" CC: Adam Roach , The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "caw@heapingbits.net" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV+GQVuKRlAtCtvEW5Lca6no8fRahFCcoA Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:48:27 +0000 Message-ID: <844FE161-95E7-4FCE-BC05-4CD1E6751E9B@isoc.org> References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> <0F866C65-65A3-4956-A187-FF39C55E7C43@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <0F866C65-65A3-4956-A187-FF39C55E7C43@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=york@isoc.org; x-originating-ip: [174.62.214.50] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 0ac4b432-3099-48df-8606-08d7c6946cda x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BL0PR06MB4529: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:6108; x-forefront-prvs: 0340850FCD x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(136003)(366004)(39840400004)(396003)(346002)(376002)(199004)(81166006)(81156014)(66476007)(6486002)(33656002)(2906002)(86362001)(5660300002)(66946007)(36756003)(8936002)(76116006)(71200400001)(4326008)(8676002)(478600001)(66574012)(4744005)(66446008)(66556008)(2616005)(64756008)(186003)(26005)(53546011)(6512007)(54906003)(316002)(6506007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BL0PR06MB4529; H:BL0PR06MB4530.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: isoc.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: ejw4pVSrfl/+l+oQ0oR3iJhyFD+W1Uk0KRBktJ8CP23pKIB3+yRmpkihQBTVpPGwSxgPQLdDDkBpBh50dvBXFb6SW3Vu3rBEkpNcoOHEkXH8bG9CEDqPZsPGgcouTpWSRacRYeoJCWVCoMFSz93D2ZyHsUI+I9MpfuhgNGoZcRqICaED0XA12EKPnu4RnJ9c7X3HulZd3THeRypPgs02UNasUAqoPF9dYB6acgk7wI3IIYdTiKBzOxU4EeKwCVeWyM3sTN0AT7Ukqj04X/nytvfr3ojZ/naLSsBTqK303dk5n3IFgTtb1njwQA5kbxuf5pnEs6BLTqkR1RbUuGxtthhzbw3G+Vwz4infVsQXRZHo5V2xSeztIr0SYuLP72KJ8/spVlhnYUpLRO8T5jQT6VeWIpsCO7PuTRtp4T4dQX6NtnEHv88DOgIBvFOMsmYU x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 8aMH8VtFsNKHMKNOn+idXEAhW0SRSNJbWwWsRAeX31OLKqzxhDRfCy6CZA8m9gZof8UzxZKEsy/QW7WMjB5hQm7BmaL7qxP4w1T5LkSd0tXhOQ4hZGYgO67ZXffPWOvFxK/gTn4K8G20P97xOXvFiQ== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <913C1187BAD03D4EA9D71BEE7C36E88A@namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0ac4b432-3099-48df-8606-08d7c6946cda X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Mar 2020 14:48:27.7435 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: NAf2ouGfqVLsOlHT4F65DbUWXefDWCrdwBO2LP2PTp2LRbNBz5eVcfxTBhgkDqHc X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL0PR06MB4529 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 14:48:39 -0000 DQpJIGFncmVlIHdpdGggRXJpY+KAmXMgY29tbWVudCBoZXJl4oCmIA0KDQo+IE9uIE1hciAxMiwg MjAyMCwgYXQgNzo0NyBBTSwgRXJpYyBWeW5ja2UgKGV2eW5ja2UpIDxldnluY2tlPTQwY2lzY28u Y29tQGRtYXJjLmlldGYub3JnPiB3cm90ZToNCj4gDQo+IEkgYWdyZWUgd2l0aCB5b3VyIGhvcGUg YnV0IEkgc3Ryb25nbHkgb2JqZWN0IHRvIHJlbW92ZSBzZW50ZW5jZS4gVGhpcyBpcyBhbHJlYWR5 IGEgbWFqb3IgaXNzdWUgdGhhdCB0aGUgSUVURiAmIElFU0cgYXJlIHByb3Bvc2luZyBhIHNpbmds ZSBjb21tZXJjaWFsIHNlcnZlcjsgYnV0LCBhdCBsZWFzdCBsZXQncyBzdGF0ZSB0aGF0IGl0IGRl dmlhdGVzIGZyb20gdGhlIElBQiBzdGF0ZW1lbnQgYWJvdXQgSVB2NiBbMV0gc28gbGV0J3Mga2Vl cCB0aGlzIHNlbnRlbmNlIG9mIGNvdXJzZSB3aXRoIGEgdGltZXN0YW1wIGFzIHlvdSBwcm9wb3Nl ZC4NCg0KDQrigKYgYmVjYXVzZSBJ4oCZdmUgaGFkIHRvIHJlcGVhdGVkbHkgYW5zd2VyIGNyaXRp Y2lzbSBhYm91dCB1c2luZyBzZXJ2aWNlcyB0aGF0IGRldmlhdGUgZnJvbSB0aGUgSUFCIGd1aWRh bmNlIG9uIElQdjYgKGFuZCB0aGUgb3ZlcmFsbCBwcm9tb3Rpb24gb2YgSVB2NiB0aHJvdWdob3V0 IElFVEYgYWN0aXZpdGllcykuICBMZXTigJlzIGp1c3QgZXhwbGljaXRseSBzdGF0ZSB0aGF0IHdl IGFyZSB1c2luZyBHaXRIdWIgd2l0aCB0aGUgZnVsbCBhd2FyZW5lc3MgdGhhdCBpdCBkb2VzIE5P VCBjb21wbHkgd2l0aCB0aGF0IElQdjYgZ3VpZGFuY2UuIA0KDQpQZXIgQWRhbeKAmXMgc3VnZ2Vz dGlvbiwgcGVyaGFwcyB0aGUgdGV4dCBvZiB0aGUgc2VudGVuY2Ugc2hvdWxkIGJlOg0KDQo+IEdp dEh1YiBpcyBmcmVlbHkgYWNjZXNzaWJsZSBvbiB0aGUgb3BlbiBJbnRlcm5ldCwgYWxiZWl0IG9u bHkgdmlhIElQdjQgYXQgdGhlIHRpbWUgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBpcyBwdWJsaXNoZWQuDQoNCg0K UmVnYXJkcywNCkRhbg== From nobody Thu Mar 12 07:57:44 2020 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 BD7083A0A05; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:57:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=fCi4FNa8; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=iufyvF2w 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 0giU1G_W11uK; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:57:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E54993A0903; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:57:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2428; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584025060; x=1585234660; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=+2RM0M6z6atrE3P8qSmp2St6gkQmD2Pbdqx7J7OhiD4=; b=fCi4FNa8ttwR2CvsyxaJF6lfz19JGINOA847DQyuvdh/W/6ZGIwD7or9 mYqARZx/AmsHlJGSRa6saPhj8PXnVafDHrtIzg2z6YQHkMn/2dGeSflEa hCRzUjFNd5YlO1jl3/72BrDSJem41zBEYHDRBHGPOmpExAau7YJgWd8PU U=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3A7uZoxxbhbcnwtMxGMoOUIb7/LSx94ef9IxIV55?= =?us-ascii?q?w7irlHbqWk+dH4MVfC4el20gebRp3VvvRDjeee87vtX2AN+96giDgDa9QNMn?= =?us-ascii?q?1NksAKh0olCc+BB1f8KavncT08F8dPfFRk5Hq8d0NSHZW2ag=3D=3D?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CzAACATWpe/4cNJK1mGgEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQMBAQEBEQEBAQICAQEBAYF7gVRQBYFEIAQLKoQVg0UDim+CX5gWglIDVAk?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEMAQEtAgQBAYRDAheBfyQ4EwIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEFBG2FVgyFYwEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?CARIREQwBATcBCwQCAQgRAwECAQICJgICAjAVCAgCBAENBSKDBIJLAw4gAaB?= =?us-ascii?q?lAoE5iGJ1gTKCfwEBBYUnGIIMCYEOKowvGoFBP4ERJyCCTT6CZASBS4MpMoI?= =?us-ascii?q?skDM7n0sKgjyWbR2bPo8Bm1kCBAIEBQIOAQEFgWkigUQMCHAVZQGCQVAYDY4?= =?us-ascii?q?dOIM7ilV0AoEnjREBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,545,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="650768168" Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 12 Mar 2020 14:57:38 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02CEvcw2022931 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:57:38 GMT Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:57:38 -0500 Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:57:37 -0500 Received: from NAM10-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:57:37 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=QVvduT5+VUXedlpTUV1TXLZK44hPQRtqZDy3UK001wQn6jn/XNEvEe3qRQ5cvpv5nfEc6qVz/uQtlmtfOtNcMuvaPmOJN0GzYE8BzBX+mXHl09OzKNuIzcPscRxXfZR9nOlP2ijASf1uUuEVoraGoFChAca6g278y1+A9QHzU9K79w8q72BOT9A34HqocF3C6LQVXMblIYIYK6MtNvrHiDqg4nR1Gfh6vnrViaR4DUmAA2Pob0qAw7XI7ivvWhxSgRYlbruqywY3DFJuW/fnTBneuZeHUbxyZmK35ROGDJLFvoPyGLFSn+36w57vErOWGmxbfhTSdm+vCDK/NxWTDQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=+2RM0M6z6atrE3P8qSmp2St6gkQmD2Pbdqx7J7OhiD4=; b=TUzURmt9bYz3pl3ME/LpcY4KUqDXch5NaMaKwynX3tyoUB1GTLiURGAxmZe12P2FhCcI93nCHD/Ipo1ESqTfbfceah2zZBOsNUECT8pEpl7ZmugvWEc0wdb2t3alkSjAERdOJsq/yaoH+RzaiGOeANsMSpB/L8U/HIJW0FlkGiX3C2YNOGN1JOfhuzw3/xifVQ/JTVOgDojomqGXk4IO5ZOn2623btz6bmjn1j7IT43AJeom9Yov+i3sD85vHIW7ckld5XKi2D0xu08uz4dy7gLRBRBVqNyX0g+Uc1sh0Xi5p0MRnNro/RC6gt9/d2mNh3TLWzTEN/I3/D/mN9HEmQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=+2RM0M6z6atrE3P8qSmp2St6gkQmD2Pbdqx7J7OhiD4=; b=iufyvF2wfNyJ4pWSRdGTrqnFhnMTUHhkMS1eNppV0aIVjLAJwdkh0XELj/n2YHugGTI32iCcSF1pUyh1CJ/0HldXHU3xNzYzX0TgJzNR0IBCTB2Cs94DOmLXQl3bSOx0P0gNJFhH7uW1sfsYGsvCUWk6Qcw3lFGOlh9Ape9U7Dg= Received: from DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:10d::13) by DM5PR11MB2057.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:d::14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.17; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:57:37 +0000 Received: from DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::680d:e22e:72d5:67ca]) by DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::680d:e22e:72d5:67ca%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.018; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:57:37 +0000 From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" To: Dan York , "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" CC: "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , The IESG , Adam Roach , "caw@heapingbits.net" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV+AgLFXzjrD2uWEmJ718kXMLuoqhE6MWAgAAhvoCAABNSAA== Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:57:36 +0000 Message-ID: <4CBC98F3-61D6-469D-AC79-92E74A83CAAA@cisco.com> References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> <0F866C65-65A3-4956-A187-FF39C55E7C43@cisco.com> <844FE161-95E7-4FCE-BC05-4CD1E6751E9B@isoc.org> In-Reply-To: <844FE161-95E7-4FCE-BC05-4CD1E6751E9B@isoc.org> Accept-Language: fr-BE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=evyncke@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c1:36:95d8:c521:e8d6:9a44] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 66e829d5-e6e1-48a2-c978-08d7c695b42f x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR11MB2057: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7691; x-forefront-prvs: 0340850FCD x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(39860400002)(346002)(366004)(376002)(136003)(396003)(199004)(6486002)(36756003)(71200400001)(86362001)(6506007)(5660300002)(53546011)(33656002)(66556008)(64756008)(66476007)(66574012)(91956017)(76116006)(66446008)(66946007)(2616005)(81156014)(8676002)(45080400002)(6512007)(316002)(81166006)(478600001)(186003)(8936002)(54906003)(2906002)(4326008)(110136005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR11MB2057; H:DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 7Jyk0RZF5oADs7lm622F87FWO7VzRM0I/kh6Vsn3Wxe8P03Sr71Y9e0t6CQ2sLUIYWuXv7A8+Rqt3wNbgMZctIphisbqfS+GbTfd5v7AFzQwQWVSWgyH28K4s37Zv+LBO5HPfdzVlD5Abzn7rmDfyrgOs3JcbzNs+D5EJn5J7LLYzd5BPZWTTwaE31u+mzrOyxfmzCRsxhQeUCn7Sz9NHO/bfa7TNeqc2pt6XYkzywAJ3d34xLxVwzJj69qOOelTrebp52NB0tRSS8qeWxO1nd4l+8nRwsXTqPjNGwTqVTmumFfMY+4ZIjJHX3325axOC2gNrm6YlBrfllWIAAo0p+w1MsmT5eO9suNAtjd9E0T+buL9VBezWj7giGRiC+XcbdGopxsHl53gxirfl2zoUKJV61gSGGndj47rkYFq+LAM0wv/Gj2efJD3k2PMnoPj x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: oQWwaRCRjnsLTisGkg0qjuvOpACr4dC/lkCxWcJqB3nbQthiM7pcPOcsx1Lw1BB3N4ugZOhI6mAvq3zbCB7QI/2Gs2N4WoR9QjtRAangX7XTS4xUm1LWFZkgEV+qm8TcqdKshAqMDpzjclbsvFhMvG4PQxNLk0CxSUuLR2rlxOf6L97yvowAjaJxJLck8IdpD0NI+SOg2pyjyODbRplW6w== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 66e829d5-e6e1-48a2-c978-08d7c695b42f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Mar 2020 14:57:37.0482 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: bU2xTlcNFFJLd0GhDu2YtdnjVGq/IDhxm91hpxrCUF1toQ2w1aMBYDIfOtAOl3olFomWaVB8RgQ9LzB2lYvBEw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR11MB2057 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.13, xch-aln-003.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-2.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 14:57:43 -0000 QW5kIHRoZSAnZnJlZWx5IGFjY2Vzc2libGUnIGlzIGFsc28gZm9yIG5vdywgd2UgZG8gbm90IGtu b3cgTWljcm9zb2Z0IHBsYW4gKGF0IGxlYXN0IEkgZG8gbm90IGtub3cpDQoNCi3DqXJpYw0KDQrv u78tLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogaWVzZyA8aWVzZy1ib3VuY2VzQGll dGYub3JnPiBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgRGFuIFlvcmsgPHlvcmtAaXNvYy5vcmc+DQpEYXRlOiBUaHVy c2RheSwgMTIgTWFyY2ggMjAyMCBhdCAxNTo0OQ0KVG86ICJFcmljIFZ5bmNrZSAoZXZ5bmNrZSki IDxldnluY2tlPTQwY2lzY28uY29tQGRtYXJjLmlldGYub3JnPg0KQ2M6ICJnaXQtY2hhaXJzQGll dGYub3JnIiA8Z2l0LWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4sICJpZXRmLWFuZC1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5vcmci IDxpZXRmLWFuZC1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5vcmc+LCAiZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1naXQtdXNpbmctZ2l0aHVi QGlldGYub3JnIiA8ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1naXQtdXNpbmctZ2l0aHViQGlldGYub3JnPiwgVGhlIElF U0cgPGllc2dAaWV0Zi5vcmc+LCBBZGFtIFJvYWNoIDxhZGFtQG5vc3RydW0uY29tPiwgImNhd0Bo ZWFwaW5nYml0cy5uZXQiIDxjYXdAaGVhcGluZ2JpdHMubmV0Pg0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtJZXRm LWFuZC1naXRodWJdIEFkYW0gUm9hY2gncyBObyBPYmplY3Rpb24gb24gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1naXQt dXNpbmctZ2l0aHViLTA1OiAod2l0aCBDT01NRU5UKQ0KDQogICAgDQogICAgSSBhZ3JlZSB3aXRo IEVyaWPigJlzIGNvbW1lbnQgaGVyZeKApiANCiAgICANCiAgICA+IE9uIE1hciAxMiwgMjAyMCwg YXQgNzo0NyBBTSwgRXJpYyBWeW5ja2UgKGV2eW5ja2UpIDxldnluY2tlPTQwY2lzY28uY29tQGRt YXJjLmlldGYub3JnPiB3cm90ZToNCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gSSBhZ3JlZSB3aXRoIHlvdXIgaG9w ZSBidXQgSSBzdHJvbmdseSBvYmplY3QgdG8gcmVtb3ZlIHNlbnRlbmNlLiBUaGlzIGlzIGFscmVh ZHkgYSBtYWpvciBpc3N1ZSB0aGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGICYgSUVTRyBhcmUgcHJvcG9zaW5nIGEgc2lu Z2xlIGNvbW1lcmNpYWwgc2VydmVyOyBidXQsIGF0IGxlYXN0IGxldCdzIHN0YXRlIHRoYXQgaXQg ZGV2aWF0ZXMgZnJvbSB0aGUgSUFCIHN0YXRlbWVudCBhYm91dCBJUHY2IFsxXSBzbyBsZXQncyBr ZWVwIHRoaXMgc2VudGVuY2Ugb2YgY291cnNlIHdpdGggYSB0aW1lc3RhbXAgYXMgeW91IHByb3Bv c2VkLg0KICAgIA0KICAgIA0KICAgIOKApiBiZWNhdXNlIEnigJl2ZSBoYWQgdG8gcmVwZWF0ZWRs eSBhbnN3ZXIgY3JpdGljaXNtIGFib3V0IHVzaW5nIHNlcnZpY2VzIHRoYXQgZGV2aWF0ZSBmcm9t IHRoZSBJQUIgZ3VpZGFuY2Ugb24gSVB2NiAoYW5kIHRoZSBvdmVyYWxsIHByb21vdGlvbiBvZiBJ UHY2IHRocm91Z2hvdXQgSUVURiBhY3Rpdml0aWVzKS4gIExldOKAmXMganVzdCBleHBsaWNpdGx5 IHN0YXRlIHRoYXQgd2UgYXJlIHVzaW5nIEdpdEh1YiB3aXRoIHRoZSBmdWxsIGF3YXJlbmVzcyB0 aGF0IGl0IGRvZXMgTk9UIGNvbXBseSB3aXRoIHRoYXQgSVB2NiBndWlkYW5jZS4gDQogICAgDQog ICAgUGVyIEFkYW3igJlzIHN1Z2dlc3Rpb24sIHBlcmhhcHMgdGhlIHRleHQgb2YgdGhlIHNlbnRl bmNlIHNob3VsZCBiZToNCiAgICANCiAgICA+IEdpdEh1YiBpcyBmcmVlbHkgYWNjZXNzaWJsZSBv biB0aGUgb3BlbiBJbnRlcm5ldCwgYWxiZWl0IG9ubHkgdmlhIElQdjQgYXQgdGhlIHRpbWUgdGhp cyBkb2N1bWVudCBpcyBwdWJsaXNoZWQuDQogICAgDQogICAgDQogICAgUmVnYXJkcywNCiAgICBE YW4NCg0K From nobody Thu Mar 12 08:01:18 2020 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 B33983A0A3C; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:01:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=isoc.org 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 NdDtImujQlt5; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAM12-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn8nam12on2052.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.237.52]) (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 CF3E23A0A23; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:01:10 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=MLoeEePqrQ1cmf02idOQcVgmKh1/K0/15SxUkTJOpFe0ZRMkk81hVclhlVd/mIPxvpifK1/IT8xjV+3qVhG9HYhyWnjY+BR8fNRA+rqxQ+vtg5GLDB5C+I5m/4vxaNe8jyrbKfGq2R8dmz82d+rPGBOoiu/CazhGVHYXiFsZhqkowDXQKuSHPZiDLHjYvzywUYCso4apqi9t7uptjCNEgoE9wnw2dDOMjtR6d3nCR4Iwx8doK08D07k1hW9SRfJpWzKzuLNKJaUT5YJ5L/UZqYuf0qc/b3/QfRHF497WHi+65R2jG3FTzjzxUO2RnDGilmtDin8eYtL41nlN+6nu1Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=IfTG6p0k7xu/gf2nJO8SHfcgTVhHqtj+biRZCdFabnU=; b=T/ojxA8sI4MEn6QF81B2X33xsntaCljsCmVsO4U6ThK7XBmjTQ6c07dzDbXQG2qENQMkPYExnhOp0tTNoz4r/UTb+T7L5rOPNgbuhX2843vSS3/DluY8y5O25ahMGNX6waPO+RTnomCdIJnUdEl3M5icegObw/ux/5T6oQIPkTyhEDu7RpjWJBQM0KUaHl1Vbs1z3WOcjIBlWlI5H5YV4M4Q58xlEwHPEu13oobWkyh5Do0Q1nUT4JrCOjNdUVmBtLALfX6O1dXd3Xlw5tWsasklCKvqJ/vAhqe5GAHlMjGoZjecl95UFu5QutQ/ravJCboRxbfKkjXbC/m7hHiSQg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=isoc.org; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=isoc.org; dkim=pass header.d=isoc.org; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.org; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=IfTG6p0k7xu/gf2nJO8SHfcgTVhHqtj+biRZCdFabnU=; b=dibnh8+A/WR1oKwu1l7QFTMcDYVFR5TUljfXuMgF4TtlTVR2H9Yly9JlrVoNuFr0JvOd0fdOWzR+xBsiT8MWcEERlAa2usTlhIdvKUoAZtgz8qj1Fj8S0vsRzccFF9rpXz56jLbrV/h4/1Xwx41VNymE/r8jmufO69lBMwmdKpQ= Received: from BL0PR06MB4530.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:5a::16) by BL0PR06MB4241.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:46::14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.16; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:01:09 +0000 Received: from BL0PR06MB4530.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3855:447b:b620:b20c]) by BL0PR06MB4530.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3855:447b:b620:b20c%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.018; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:01:09 +0000 From: Dan York To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" CC: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , The IESG , Adam Roach , "caw@heapingbits.net" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV+GQVuKRlAtCtvEW5Lca6no8fRahFCcoAgAACjwCAAAD9AA== Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:01:09 +0000 Message-ID: <8DE346FF-5414-4816-8B08-D879C4DFEC0C@isoc.org> References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> <0F866C65-65A3-4956-A187-FF39C55E7C43@cisco.com> <844FE161-95E7-4FCE-BC05-4CD1E6751E9B@isoc.org> <4CBC98F3-61D6-469D-AC79-92E74A83CAAA@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4CBC98F3-61D6-469D-AC79-92E74A83CAAA@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=york@isoc.org; x-originating-ip: [174.62.214.50] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e9668ca9-901e-40f5-742f-08d7c69632b1 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BL0PR06MB4241: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:6108; x-forefront-prvs: 0340850FCD x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(366004)(199004)(5660300002)(2616005)(8676002)(66946007)(81166006)(8936002)(498600001)(81156014)(33656002)(66446008)(76116006)(6506007)(66476007)(66556008)(64756008)(53546011)(71200400001)(66574012)(54906003)(36756003)(2906002)(45080400002)(6486002)(4326008)(4744005)(6916009)(186003)(26005)(6512007)(86362001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BL0PR06MB4241; H:BL0PR06MB4530.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: isoc.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: igpWjuQsJWKWmZU8NkvrknYIby3Ag/DrvXx3q8B+2cnZMp7JLMLE7rSrULM7jhvrDoLNMYS0YhsT7PgrXL5KrVYbGFbm2S16mEXCyvZlu1i2BqjszAt44TMsV+cEIm86m+ErqppXdGz1p0cHAa7woG4jbkVskLJoqc/EbxUzYYZsg+zR5029b5pYGfV9mSJhijKok5sDesfqP9GRDTYUZhjpuMGxVLO8hhSG96Ry492HQw1fGa43rI3yQuccRg7H2Z1DAgMBdwK6n2ZoBI8JBQ/TsdZ+7SqFHKbfiSPhrLHxz+nyPg2zq3E4mgh4XuMya2sO6b0WnIzUmwxJNLUlkqgabmgo/+AM6fVBQ9a1W406lK5/8QTkTHrRwKGS4ZZMSrVAog2Q+BOYPE/r9AxMiBId6pF1pmhGJBPg+/pTmu8Kdw+ezTOrNvlifpiRRmtq x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: P7N56nm3OsKK1f81DqBgbPIFGYO1KvkgB8E2P1FazvDxK63U020sXdkaDPHy33L92MSHAIYH7zP6Vp8z5hP9fiAWoWQAWwjJ07JRjKAft/WD9T6++QAg8Q6fT8lVyAk8CDT9w3dD6vvHi6Vpdi760A== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e9668ca9-901e-40f5-742f-08d7c69632b1 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Mar 2020 15:01:09.2519 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: kE3zOx8qeod9d2cyMdwHXTYCgnU+FMBoRKCOFTvhjoXCYCNPlzoEMxHEnf22IWC8 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL0PR06MB4241 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 15:01:13 -0000 DQo+IE9uIE1hciAxMiwgMjAyMCwgYXQgMTA6NTcgQU0sIEVyaWMgVnluY2tlIChldnluY2tlKSA8 ZXZ5bmNrZUBjaXNjby5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPiANCj4gQW5kIHRoZSAnZnJlZWx5IGFjY2Vzc2li bGUnIGlzIGFsc28gZm9yIG5vdywgd2UgZG8gbm90IGtub3cgTWljcm9zb2Z0IHBsYW4gKGF0IGxl YXN0IEkgZG8gbm90IGtub3cpDQoNCldlbGwsIHRydWXigKYgb2theSwgc28gdGhlbiB0aGUgc2Vu dGVuY2UgY291bGQgYmU6DQoNCiAgIkF0IHRoZSB0aW1lIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgaXMgcHVibGlz aGVkLCBHaXRIdWIgaXMgZnJlZWx5IGFjY2Vzc2libGUgb24gdGhlIG9wZW4gSW50ZXJuZXQsIGFs YmVpdCBvbmx5IHZpYSBJUHY0LuKAnQ0KDQpUaGF0IHNob3VsZCBjb3ZlciBib3RoIHBhcnRzIG9m IHRoYXQgc2VudGVuY2UuDQoNCkRhbg0KDQo= From nobody Thu Mar 12 08:02:48 2020 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 5B9BA3A0B5C for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:02:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 52A0DzRTx4Qs for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:02:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 9474E3A0A88 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CF2b2g024298 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:02:37 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 3615D207DFB for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:02:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BC61207DE1 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:02:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.11.240.10] ([10.11.240.10]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CF2al6020458 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:02:36 +0100 To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158397412236.19821.1273610782724376897@ietfa.amsl.com> <0F866C65-65A3-4956-A187-FF39C55E7C43@cisco.com> <844FE161-95E7-4FCE-BC05-4CD1E6751E9B@isoc.org> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:02:36 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <844FE161-95E7-4FCE-BC05-4CD1E6751E9B@isoc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 15:02:47 -0000 Le 12/03/2020 à 15:48, Dan York a écrit : > > I agree with Eric’s comment here… > >> On Mar 12, 2020, at 7:47 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote: >> >> I agree with your hope but I strongly object to remove sentence. This is already a major issue that the IETF & IESG are proposing a single commercial server; but, at least let's state that it deviates from the IAB statement about IPv6 [1] so let's keep this sentence of course with a timestamp as you proposed. > > > … because I’ve had to repeatedly answer criticism about using services that deviate from the IAB guidance on IPv6 (and the overall promotion of IPv6 throughout IETF activities). Let’s just explicitly state that we are using GitHub with the full awareness that it does NOT comply with that IPv6 guidance. > > Per Adam’s suggestion, perhaps the text of the sentence should be: > >> GitHub is freely accessible on the open Internet, albeit only via IPv4 at the time this document is published. BCP MUST github IPv6. At this time, github.com is not a BCP. This BCP does not recommend github.com. This BCP requires to not use github.com. This BCP states that github.com MUST not be used at this time. Please let us make things simple. Please do not turn and turn and turn statements after statements. Things are what they are lets name them. Alex > > > Regards, > Dan > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Thu Mar 12 08:05:41 2020 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 A63F03A0A48 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:05:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 xKvr_agyLiik for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:05:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm1-x342.google.com (mail-wm1-x342.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::342]) (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 D72153A03EB for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:05:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x342.google.com with SMTP id 11so6465809wmo.2 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:05:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=66/I9FTAG+FQpMe12O64JmHHcsr8IZz76kmxTQp/CQM=; b=JXF6qPez9khwd62gwRjsVMvG56SBfXA8jc+m1MrlOBjV9Wp5qb5ACJ84MyTeBQdTcq eegqiHOO9tKnxMsO2YIr4a4uI8Aowa+1+9LJBctz0QLqSWKYWHSTObtlkkKqix1flTyS ThNXJwhrjhU2RXTOEFrob0RhOBB7KOQtoKBbRgNFiKV6klREFMjV8BiSAv4/DX585eSZ GVxwXRbdnbaCVPxG+QwDCOEEWzTBpz7UcbDqnTu8SelDSl1MAQflFdGFguw6bRdk/4FN 7qz+h0ofizhZt53WIXpa2MA8tHlSDUkESGECj3LIkujuQt9ADhN/FMXc7OpV0+65tbfX fGaA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=66/I9FTAG+FQpMe12O64JmHHcsr8IZz76kmxTQp/CQM=; b=hcdKjwhd1dnHw40vOV0eZWMz7aPZHOJZmsojgJgXm6MPiHoOGjPmXtWi0MnS0drSi1 9EC8pe+JRabKmlN8+sm9AhfQEUubK5gHuhSkXu42GjicC4ihVyLKxodLLOxSt4EdJnHq ijsBrv25Xkgl6wUt7dUdtpy87Jjv2pbwfgZmYckHKg8MjMG/ZLr1XwSYjDh0amJuToT1 5dgiV4A0o8GR8i1rpCr6mfeyR+zSMz/ZR5L/xSNaZAu5m10LA3BbFzyXoWFJR2cTeUky QAyNw/1tCbkgwn0SEYeWdKlIZoR9WF/c3jpY6EW3X3NmdIQMaxZJciZg9PyK9bHkDSML zNuA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3kRTuhPCJeVaaxwLezMbwW/lx4YleaADQLDKEjqKga7KY0M03z sl1QHA5VG4jbrYT7sOpLg1qEW7Wk X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vve1CkxZ34TR1H0j0FqR5k9DrVKx9fQjIxWhG2mS51W2jQBBS6gBVhzKiJwo6fijQ2EEHHJrg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:618:: with SMTP id o24mr5537877wmm.128.1584025536196; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:05:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from broadband.bt.com ([2a00:23a8:4140:0:a0a7:a4c5:a18b:5118]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k18sm25525834wru.94.2020.03.12.08.05.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Stewart Bryant In-Reply-To: <976d4e5c-a18a-d224-bcf4-567cfc59ea65@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:05:32 +0000 Cc: Stewart Bryant , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3F2E9415-B1AC-491C-812D-4F91D39030E2@gmail.com> References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> <976d4e5c-a18a-d224-bcf4-567cfc59ea65@gmail.com> To: Alexandre Petrescu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 15:05:40 -0000 Pragmatism should alway trump perfection - Stewart > On 12 Mar 2020, at 14:23, Alexandre Petrescu = wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > I do not understand - will this become a BCP even though github is = IPv4-only? >=20 > I am asking, because if it is so, then I think I disagree. >=20 > Alex >=20 >=20 > Le 12/03/2020 =C3=A0 15:16, Alissa Cooper a =C3=A9crit : >> WG: >> Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I said I = would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if no one from = the WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP number when it = is published. >> Alissa >>> On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Alissa Cooper = wrote: >>>=20 >>> I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian suggested it = so I added the note. I=E2=80=99m happy to remove the note if necessary. >>>=20 >>> Alissa >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Brian: >>>>=20 >>>> Hi! >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> DISCUSS: >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this = document as a >>>>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF = community. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet = Standards >>>>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. = Whether working >>>>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support = their >>>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF = Working Group >>>>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it = represents >>>>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision = "to use >>>>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their = discretion.." >>>>>=20 >>>>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction = help? >>>>=20 >>>> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having = this >>>> document be part of BCP 25. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> .... >>>>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this = document >>>>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would = be part of >>>>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG = to discuss >>>>>> this topic. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP = number?) was >>>>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with = a bit of >>>>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community = discussion, of >>>>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). >>>>=20 >>>> No, I don't think things have changed. In this case, the AD added = a >>>> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to = BCP >>>> 25 at the time of publication." >>>>=20 >>>> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies >>>> directly to WG operation. The intention of adding documents to it >>>> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks! >>>>=20 >>>> Alvaro. >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Thu Mar 12 08:12:05 2020 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 8C82B3A0A7E for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:12:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.669 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FGX3l7TTzuTC for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 104793A0A5E for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:11:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CFBsX9008185; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:11:54 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D7A3207E32; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:11:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F625207E36; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:11:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.11.240.10] ([10.11.240.10]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CFBrVr027860; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:11:54 +0100 To: Stewart Bryant Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> <976d4e5c-a18a-d224-bcf4-567cfc59ea65@gmail.com> <3F2E9415-B1AC-491C-812D-4F91D39030E2@gmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <2470dcfa-ced5-2cbd-3c4a-9bbc82fda74a@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:11:53 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3F2E9415-B1AC-491C-812D-4F91D39030E2@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 15:12:04 -0000 I pragmatically say - I disagree with BCP github.com IPv4. I wait a bit and I might unregister from this group, even though I recently gladly accepted the invitation to join. Things move fast :-) Alex Le 12/03/2020 à 16:05, Stewart Bryant a écrit : > Pragmatism should alway trump perfection > > - Stewart > >> On 12 Mar 2020, at 14:23, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I do not understand - will this become a BCP even though github is IPv4-only? >> >> I am asking, because if it is so, then I think I disagree. >> >> Alex >> >> >> Le 12/03/2020 à 15:16, Alissa Cooper a écrit : >>> WG: >>> Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I said I would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if no one from the WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP number when it is published. >>> Alissa >>>> On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>>> >>>> I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian suggested it so I added the note. I’m happy to remove the note if necessary. >>>> >>>> Alissa >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Brian: >>>>> >>>>> Hi! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> DISCUSS: >>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this document as a >>>>>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF community. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Standards >>>>>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether working >>>>>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their >>>>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working Group >>>>>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it represents >>>>>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision "to use >>>>>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their discretion.." >>>>>> >>>>>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction help? >>>>> >>>>> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having this >>>>> document be part of BCP 25. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> .... >>>>>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this document >>>>>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be part of >>>>>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to discuss >>>>>>> this topic. >>>>>> >>>>>> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP number?) was >>>>>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with a bit of >>>>>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community discussion, of >>>>>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). >>>>> >>>>> No, I don't think things have changed. In this case, the AD added a >>>>> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to BCP >>>>> 25 at the time of publication." >>>>> >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies >>>>> directly to WG operation. The intention of adding documents to it >>>>> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> Alvaro. >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list >>>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Thu Mar 12 08:21:11 2020 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 0AE1F3A0A6C for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:21:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 4zF1xX5TLpCF for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:21:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi1-x243.google.com (mail-oi1-x243.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::243]) (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 2C0643A0789 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:21:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x243.google.com with SMTP id d62so5796125oia.11 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:21:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LMPXdz+QZsBfMfVJ+BZ6w5ESOp8see0yedy+UQp3pFA=; b=kq9+uSQ65t73jot3CLu4Slza1pFk0Kz4O492lv+bQOFZNOmP6uNoHFyYjRYBuGLUJk SxzsMvt2CqsndoLuRB6Zuxm4MaNTqauWU+CuF6s14tENvxEDGICtXGWoc1H3rrVgPggE LJsUKnX8neiq6TXTr1AmlcQ4j1K8RnqBFiFePFTS9e/r7eB1YciZ4wvUvpjbS2u1zBm+ DuSv2Ho+44K2GB+hDysLgIP9Gbz+mcj4yB8hYVDhKH4ZX7Y1g27i+C9wFT6mgHsPISop 79MXDkbiJ90nqDiXBYxYycal8Ng6SELeU6Nu1iUTNAwKy9vrOm4Mw7M3926l4Zn7SN29 VOog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LMPXdz+QZsBfMfVJ+BZ6w5ESOp8see0yedy+UQp3pFA=; b=FcrLkI/TjUdjnRfL8X6q+QsHeqC8Z0jv87M3pshMzKgvqUTjHkkvbB8TG7tLaIXUpr FaDr53fKcSLCY8LMw0k527LxAiJK0uDu2zDbOzmPzr9BSm2Vfkhx2Zdx2N2dSgmXPtHc CrRg1ONjKsP5SHzYEwTbNTrKm6TCXgzawwz10uGAWUHlrzPqW+jIOv3Zk43x+ZHMLunj QJ30lmxnYeTZChLQ/LTC9n3k3IZYAkbwNHF5p3R6i8qTwZEE5r9AsvNsHe+PAm+/m0WC pdZBWa1lb+ABOdDfsx8DARpTeVCPDUnlmTb0N+kWyDGARYFqhSIYmvA1v26ZfRjs4ld2 JGQw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0uWcHzw4x+uqLdwtlbMGo3rTYoeN2d7cJ0GP9DAC/aAkXsb7WI JXd2FKMZN8Schvj4rpzLH0noAJbUT3Fz6xMD0vM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuLhZ47rRU+PIUJxnA2Fb6hWPtl2VHYNxCbXeRmm0albPVlD8baiMknprOfOFZm0p15ewEe8f5LnIjrzjd0rks= X-Received: by 2002:aca:3196:: with SMTP id x144mr3100147oix.77.1584026466297; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:21:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> <976d4e5c-a18a-d224-bcf4-567cfc59ea65@gmail.com> <3F2E9415-B1AC-491C-812D-4F91D39030E2@gmail.com> <2470dcfa-ced5-2cbd-3c4a-9bbc82fda74a@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2470dcfa-ced5-2cbd-3c4a-9bbc82fda74a@gmail.com> From: Erik Kline Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:20:55 -0700 Message-ID: To: Alexandre Petrescu Cc: Stewart Bryant , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d6ab7c05a0a9e6b5" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 15:21:09 -0000 --000000000000d6ab7c05a0a9e6b5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable As someone else said, I think the BCP is not that working groups should use github but rather that if they do chose to this documents BCP considerations for how to do so. (But I do think it's disappointing that github.com [and gitlab.com] seem to be IPv4-only in 2020.) On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 8:12 AM Alexandre Petrescu < alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote: > I pragmatically say - I disagree with BCP github.com IPv4. > > I wait a bit and I might unregister from this group, even though I > recently gladly accepted the invitation to join. Things move fast :-) > > Alex > > > Le 12/03/2020 =C3=A0 16:05, Stewart Bryant a =C3=A9crit : > > Pragmatism should alway trump perfection > > > > - Stewart > > > >> On 12 Mar 2020, at 14:23, Alexandre Petrescu < > alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I do not understand - will this become a BCP even though github is > IPv4-only? > >> > >> I am asking, because if it is so, then I think I disagree. > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> > >> Le 12/03/2020 =C3=A0 15:16, Alissa Cooper a =C3=A9crit : > >>> WG: > >>> Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I said I > would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if no one from t= he > WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP number when it is > published. > >>> Alissa > >>>> On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote= : > >>>> > >>>> I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian suggested it > so I added the note. I=E2=80=99m happy to remove the note if necessary. > >>>> > >>>> Alissa > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Brian: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi! > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>> DISCUSS: > >>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this > document as a > >>>>>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF > community. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet > Standards > >>>>>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whethe= r > working > >>>>>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support > their > >>>>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Workin= g > Group > >>>>>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it > represents > >>>>>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision > "to use > >>>>>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their > discretion.." > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction > help? > >>>>> > >>>>> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having th= is > >>>>> document be part of BCP 25. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> .... > >>>>>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this > document > >>>>>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would b= e > part of > >>>>>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG > to discuss > >>>>>>> this topic. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP > number?) was > >>>>>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with = a > bit of > >>>>>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community > discussion, of > >>>>>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). > >>>>> > >>>>> No, I don't think things have changed. In this case, the AD added = a > >>>>> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to > BCP > >>>>> 25 at the time of publication." > >>>>> > >>>>> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies > >>>>> directly to WG operation. The intention of adding documents to it > >>>>> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks! > >>>>> > >>>>> Alvaro. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >>>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > --000000000000d6ab7c05a0a9e6b5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As someone else said, I think the BCP is not that working = groups should use github but rather that if they do chose to this documents= BCP considerations for how to do so.

(But I do think it= 's disappointing that github.com [and= gitlab.com] seem to be IPv4-only in 2020= .)

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 8:12 AM Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wr= ote:
I pragmatic= ally say - I disagree with BCP github.com IPv4.

I wait a bit and I might unregister from this group, even though I
recently gladly accepted the invitation to join.=C2=A0 Things move fast :-)=

Alex


Le 12/03/2020 =C3=A0 16:05, Stewart Bryant a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:
> Pragmatism should alway trump perfection
>
> - Stewart
>
>> On 12 Mar 2020, at 14:23, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.c= om> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I do not understand - will this become a BCP even though github is= IPv4-only?
>>
>> I am asking, because if it is so, then I think I disagree.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>> Le 12/03/2020 =C3=A0 15:16, Alissa Cooper a =C3=A9crit :
>>> WG:
>>> Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I = said I would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if no one f= rom the WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP number when it = is published.
>>> Alissa
>>>> On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote= :
>>>>
>>>> I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian su= ggested it so I added the note. I=E2=80=99m happy to remove the note if nec= essary.
>>>>
>>>> Alissa
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com= > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wro= te:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Brian:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------= ------------------------
>>>>>>> DISCUSS:
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------= ------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe= the status of this document as a
>>>>>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the W= G or with the IETF community.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly men= tions BCP 9:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The documents produced by this group will not = alter the Internet Standards
>>>>>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to wor= k within it. Whether working
>>>>>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented = policies to support their
>>>>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion.=
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, including this document as a part of = BCP 25 (IETF Working Group
>>>>>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the inte= rpretation that it represents
>>>>>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not= that the decision "to use
>>>>>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...ent= irely at their discretion.."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract an= d Introduction help?
>>>>>
>>>>> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help wit= h my issue: having this
>>>>> document be part of BCP 25.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ....
>>>>>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conc= lusion that this document
>>>>>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that th= is document would be part of
>>>>>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would= like for the IESG to discuss
>>>>>>> this topic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have things changed? In the old days this question= (which BCP number?) was
>>>>>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor= , possibly with a bit of
>>>>>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't obje= ct to community discussion, of
>>>>>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 = recently).
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I don't think things have changed.=C2=A0 In th= is case, the AD added a
>>>>> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append= this document to BCP
>>>>> 25 at the time of publication."
>>>>>
>>>>> https://da= tatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case becau= se it applies
>>>>> directly to WG operation.=C2=A0 The intention of addin= g documents to it
>>>>> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should = exist.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> Alvaro.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list
>>>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/l= istinfo/ietf-and-github
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list
>>> = Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listi= nfo/ietf-and-github
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf-and-github mailing list
>> Ietf= -and-github@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/= ietf-and-github
>

_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-gith= ub@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-= github
--000000000000d6ab7c05a0a9e6b5-- From nobody Thu Mar 12 08:32:41 2020 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 D0A543A0C63 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:32:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 UT4gF-5YDLRv for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:32:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 41BD53A0B94 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:32:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050095.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02CF5eE2030456; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:32:30 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=lScN7obMQt5LSiXWVF506E5O/byPeQxY9MyJqV9lT7k=; b=nOHHt/ZG2Gbd/MdIkY/lsjC2oO94Zs9iVI+dphO/csY16qYwFffuy1zENVqB8FPnU9iM SGVPLzjggfEFIlhIqomGVwxMMCHUTQ/YZCqGNAnmP27ZWJIcEry4tMS8fz2TnOVhba+D B1G+nKXamyytCnf5cIQpondLsW3WUPrNiHjdRt905L0yLtFcJac++4dh2qFlY8i2GT4Q lgsNjoesgJuekDQSTL2cyU3xBRdjLWMx1Bpl31nFOeuYDVFBh3kNjJoUIM1cU0xpVPAZ Hzj4f+rtmlbmA1UEgzLPtQyfPwzyBDHRc01IbSbbjD4NH7q/CTTUpiVNO2/8r7jgO7Ta 2g== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint6 (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [184.51.33.61] (may be forged)) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2ym41apkm6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:32:30 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02CFWSKK003899; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:32:28 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.53]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ym7ty4hfv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:32:28 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:32:21 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:32:21 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Erik Kline , Alexandre Petrescu CC: Stewart Bryant , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV99akHQ3gwVwzl0i/WlQzHHaVAahECxkAgAASugCAAQxZgIAAGtqAgAACAoCAAAuyAIAAAcaAgAAChoD//8AkgA== Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:32:21 +0000 Message-ID: References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> <976d4e5c-a18a-d224-bcf4-567cfc59ea65@gmail.com> <3F2E9415-B1AC-491C-812D-4F91D39030E2@gmail.com> <2470dcfa-ced5-2cbd-3c4a-9bbc82fda74a@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.113.26] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_AB622100738C4031ABC889A70B7C664Dakamaicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-12_07:2020-03-11, 2020-03-12 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=808 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002050000 definitions=main-2003120082 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-12_07:2020-03-11, 2020-03-12 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=786 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1011 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2003120081 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 15:32:40 -0000 --_000_AB622100738C4031ABC889A70B7C664Dakamaicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 ICAqICAgQXMgc29tZW9uZSBlbHNlIHNhaWQsIEkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIEJDUCBpcyBub3QgdGhhdCB3 b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwcyBzaG91bGQgdXNlIGdpdGh1YiBidXQgcmF0aGVyIHRoYXQgaWYgdGhleSBk byBjaG9zZSB0byB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50cyBCQ1AgY29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMgZm9yIGhvdyB0byBk byBzby4NCg0KWWVzIGV4YWN0bHkuDQo= --_000_AB622100738C4031ABC889A70B7C664Dakamaicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <733E01F848042641A1D14A219D2E5582@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6bz0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6b2ZmaWNlIiB4 bWxuczp3PSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTp3b3JkIiB4bWxuczptPSJo dHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL29mZmljZS8yMDA0LzEyL29tbWwiIHhtbG5zPSJo dHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy9UUi9SRUMtaHRtbDQwIj4NCjxoZWFkPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVp dj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KPG1l dGEgbmFtZT0iR2VuZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCAxNSAoZmlsdGVyZWQg bWVkaXVtKSI+DQo8c3R5bGU+PCEtLQ0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGZvbnQtZmFj ZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6NSAwIDAgMCAwIDAgMCAwIDAg MDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYW1icmlhIE1hdGgiOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0x OjIgNCA1IDMgNSA0IDYgMyAyIDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJp Ow0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgMTUgNSAyIDIgMiA0IDMgMiA0O30NCi8qIFN0eWxlIERlZmluaXRpb25z ICovDQpwLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgbGkuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBkaXYuTXNvTm9ybWFsDQoJe21hcmdpbjow aW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7fQ0KcC5Nc29MaXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoLCBsaS5Nc29M aXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoLCBkaXYuTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6 MzQ7DQoJbWFyZ2luLXRvcDowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLXJpZ2h0OjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t OjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tbGVmdDouNWluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmO30NCnNwYW4u RW1haWxTdHlsZTE4DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOnBlcnNvbmFsLXJlcGx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmOw0KCWNvbG9yOndpbmRvd3RleHQ7fQ0KLk1zb0NocERl ZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9ubHk7DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDt9 DQpAcGFnZSBXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7c2l6ZTo4LjVpbiAxMS4waW47DQoJbWFyZ2luOjEuMGlu IDEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluO30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2VjdGlv bjE7fQ0KLyogTGlzdCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGxpc3QgbDANCgl7bXNvLWxpc3QtaWQ6NTMy NTcxMzgwOw0KCW1zby1saXN0LXR5cGU6aHlicmlkOw0KCW1zby1saXN0LXRlbXBsYXRlLWlkczox Nzg5MDE2MTkyIC01NTMwNzg4OTIgNjc2OTg2OTEgNjc2OTg2OTMgNjc2OTg2ODkgNjc2OTg2OTEg Njc2OTg2OTMgNjc2OTg2ODkgNjc2OTg2OTEgNjc2OTg2OTM7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWwxDQoJ e21zby1sZXZlbC1zdGFydC1hdDowOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsN Cgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrvg5g7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxl dmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCgltc28tYW5z aS1mb250LXNpemU6MTIuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OldpbmdkaW5nczsNCgltc28tZmFyZWFz dC1mb250LWZhbWlseToiVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuIjsNCgltc28tYmlkaS1mb250LWZhbWlseTpD YWxpYnJpOw0KCW1zby1hbnNpLWZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQ7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWwyDQoJ e21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDpvOw0KCW1z by1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsN Cgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNvdXJpZXIgTmV3Ijt9DQpAbGlz dCBsMDpsZXZlbDMNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZl bC10ZXh0Ou+CpzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVy LXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5Oldpbmdk aW5nczsNCgltc28tYmlkaS1mb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw0 DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrvgrc7 DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjps ZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpTeW1ib2w7DQoJbXNvLWJp ZGktZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6U3ltYm9sO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNQ0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVt YmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6bzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0 b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6 LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDb3VyaWVyIE5ldyI7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw2DQoJ e21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrvgqc7DQoJ bXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0 Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7DQoJbXNvLWJp ZGktZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNw0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwt bnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674K3Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10 YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWlu ZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6U3ltYm9sOw0KCW1zby1iaWRpLWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5 OlN5bWJvbDt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDgNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVs bGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Om87DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNv LWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250 LWZhbWlseToiQ291cmllciBOZXciO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsOQ0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVt YmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674KnOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWIt c3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVu dDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzOw0KCW1zby1iaWRpLWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5 OldpbmdkaW5nczt9DQpvbA0KCXttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjBpbjt9DQp1bA0KCXttYXJnaW4tYm90 dG9tOjBpbjt9DQotLT48L3N0eWxlPg0KPC9oZWFkPg0KPGJvZHkgbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIGxpbms9 ImJsdWUiIHZsaW5rPSJwdXJwbGUiPg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xIj4NCjxkaXY+ DQo8dWwgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi10b3A6MGluIiB0eXBlPSJkaXNjIj4NCjxsaSBjbGFzcz0iTXNv TGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjBpbjttc28tbGlzdDpsMCBsZXZlbDEg bGZvMSI+QXMgc29tZW9uZSBlbHNlIHNhaWQsIEkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIEJDUCBpcyBub3QgdGhhdCB3 b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwcyBzaG91bGQgdXNlIGdpdGh1YiBidXQgcmF0aGVyIHRoYXQgaWYgdGhleSBk byBjaG9zZSB0byB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50cyBCQ1AgY29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMgZm9yIGhvdyB0byBk byBzby4NCjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9saT48L3VsPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PG86cD4m bmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5ZZXMgZXhhY3RseS48bzpwPjwv bzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_AB622100738C4031ABC889A70B7C664Dakamaicom_-- From nobody Thu Mar 12 08:32:47 2020 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 EA8E23A0C7A for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:32:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.669 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VZzamx6jT59Y for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:32:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.148]) (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 953513A0C7B for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:32:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CFWXTX017647; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:32:33 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 669A8207E5C; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:32:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56139207E15; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:32:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.11.240.10] ([10.11.240.10]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CFWWeA009593; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:32:32 +0100 To: Erik Kline Cc: Stewart Bryant , ietf-and-github@ietf.org References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> <976d4e5c-a18a-d224-bcf4-567cfc59ea65@gmail.com> <3F2E9415-B1AC-491C-812D-4F91D39030E2@gmail.com> <2470dcfa-ced5-2cbd-3c4a-9bbc82fda74a@gmail.com> From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:32:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 15:32:44 -0000 Le 12/03/2020 à 16:20, Erik Kline a écrit : > As someone else said, I think the BCP is not that working groups should > use github but rather that if they do chose to this documents BCP > considerations for how to do so. Even then, nobody at IETF can recommend to use github.com. Because it is IPv4 only. A BCP documents the best common practice, and the best _current_ practice. A very good current practice can be observed as it happens right now. It is a practice. How is github.com used by people? Is that practice ok? It is ok, but it is not the best, at least because it is over IPv4 and not over IPv6. How are people using github.tools.ietf.org? I dont know, because it does not exist. Lets build it, try it on IPv6, suggest it to people to use, and then look whether we can BCP it. BCP github, is some theoretical concept that is not understood. One more RFC with things in theory that are interpreted in many different ways? Alex > > (But I do think it's disappointing that github.com > [and gitlab.com ] seem to be IPv4-only in 2020.) > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 8:12 AM Alexandre Petrescu > > wrote: > > I pragmatically say - I disagree with BCP github.com > IPv4. > > I wait a bit and I might unregister from this group, even though I > recently gladly accepted the invitation to join.  Things move fast :-) > > Alex > > > Le 12/03/2020 à 16:05, Stewart Bryant a écrit : > > Pragmatism should alway trump perfection > > > > - Stewart > > > >> On 12 Mar 2020, at 14:23, Alexandre Petrescu > > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I do not understand - will this become a BCP even though github > is IPv4-only? > >> > >> I am asking, because if it is so, then I think I disagree. > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> > >> Le 12/03/2020 à 15:16, Alissa Cooper a écrit : > >>> WG: > >>> Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I > said I would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if > no one from the WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP > number when it is published. > >>> Alissa > >>>> On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Alissa Cooper > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian > suggested it so I added the note. I’m happy to remove the note if > necessary. > >>>> > >>>> Alissa > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana > > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Brian: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi! > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>> DISCUSS: > >>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of > this document as a > >>>>>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the > IETF community. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the > Internet Standards > >>>>>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. > Whether working > >>>>>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to > support their > >>>>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF > Working Group > >>>>>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation > that it represents > >>>>>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the > decision "to use > >>>>>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at > their discretion.." > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and > Introduction help? > >>>>> > >>>>> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: > having this > >>>>> document be part of BCP 25. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> .... > >>>>>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that > this document > >>>>>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document > would be part of > >>>>>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the > IESG to discuss > >>>>>>> this topic. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which > BCP number?) was > >>>>>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly > with a bit of > >>>>>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to > community discussion, of > >>>>>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). > >>>>> > >>>>> No, I don't think things have changed.  In this case, the AD > added a > >>>>> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this > document to BCP > >>>>> 25 at the time of publication." > >>>>> > >>>>> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it > applies > >>>>> directly to WG operation.  The intention of adding documents > to it > >>>>> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks! > >>>>> > >>>>> Alvaro. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >>>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Thu Mar 12 11:27:29 2020 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 8127A3A0F23; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:27:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 JeWR3vtyB4WZ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:27:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (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 C1F503A0F21; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:27:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p200300dee7239a006dec5d8de6396bdf.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e723:9a00:6dec:5d8d:e639:6bdf]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1jCSY7-000764-B9; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:27:15 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) From: Mirja Kuehlewind In-Reply-To: <518946b5-c848-43ec-9ef1-99e9c925a20e@www.fastmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:27:14 +0100 Cc: The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158384439069.15427.16653271470255787018@ietfa.amsl.com> <518946b5-c848-43ec-9ef1-99e9c925a20e@www.fastmail.com> To: Martin Thomson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1584037639;53ecd2de; X-HE-SMSGID: 1jCSY7-000764-B9 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objectio?= =?utf-8?q?n_on_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 18:27:23 -0000 Hi Martin, See inline. > On 11. Mar 2020, at 07:50, Martin Thomson wrote: >=20 > Hi Mirja, >=20 > Thanks for taking the time to read through this. I appreciate the = input.. >=20 > I've made some changes in = https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/45 but we might want to = iterate on that some more. >=20 > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 23:46, Mirja K=C3=BChlewind via Datatracker = wrote: >> I don't really understand the relationship between this document and >> draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration.=20 >=20 > I think that document encompasses most of the stuff that I don't = believe is appropriate for a BCP, so I think that the split is useful. = I think that others have addressed questions about the suitability of = that document for publication. I think having a split would be fine (also there is a bit of a question = if draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration needs to be published as RFC), = however, this doesn=E2=80=99t seem like a clear split because there is a = lot of redundant requirements in this docent in section 2 (as well as = some sentences in 3) and I don=E2=80=99t see a value in stating it twice = in two different documents (especially as this one seems to be the one = that states it normatively).=20 >=20 >> 1) Sec 3.2 >> "...or they might create repositories for individual documents on = request." >> I made a similar comment in my ballot for >> draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration. I think creating repos for = individuals >> document is maybe not always the best option. I assume the intention = here to >> not out-rule any cases where this might be okay (e.g. if a document = is expectd >> to be adopted soon), however, I would rather prefer to see a = recommendation to >> usually not do that as there can be many individual drafts in the = groups and it >> can provide a wrong signal if repos are created for some and not = others. >=20 > The intention is to not be specific. What I have heard, from multiple = Working Group chairs, is that they have allowed people to create repos = for individual contributions in the organization and that they - and = their contributors - have found it to be valuable. Chairs who do this = seem to be quite open about allowing anyone to request a repo. That = seems like a healthy balance. >=20 > I think that is good, because it removes any implied status involved = in having a draft repo in the org. I personally have fewer issues with = moving repos than Warren does, so maybe I don't mind keeping things = private until they are adopted. Other do report challenges though. There is a risk if chairs allow repos for some draft but not other, that = those drafts are seen as more important. So I think some more discussion = is needed in this document that if a wg decide to support individual = drafts in their GitHub organisation, they are expected to give that = opportunity to everybody asking. However, I still see some higher risk here for confusing for people who = are less familiar with the IETF and the respective naming convention. In = the datatracker the document for each wg are clearly separated into a = section for wg doc and other related docs. That is less obvious on = GitHub, especially for people who only find things over GitHub and are = not aware of e.g. the datatracker or other IETF processes. I=E2=80=99m not saying we should forbid this. Chairs are free in how = they think they can manage their groups best. But I also think we should = not recommend it. Also we should probably give more guidelines how to = make it more clear that documents have different status in GitHub = besides the draft name. E.g. there is the repo description that could = include a =E2=80=9Cwarning=E2=80=9D. Or we could recommend to have all = wg doc repos as pinned repos but other not=E2=80=A6 >=20 >> 2) Sec 4.1.3: >> " Issues that have reached a resolution that has Working Group >> consensus MUST NOT be reopened unless new information is = presented." >> I do understand the intention here as it is important to make = process, however, >> inline with the rest of the document and the general idea that = practises can >> vary from group to group, I think this really should be a SHOULD NOT = only. >=20 > This has been iterated on since after Barry's review. Do the changes = in https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/43 work here? Yes that=E2=80=99s much better. Thanks! >=20 >> 3) Sec 4.2: >> " Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes = rather >> than committing directly to the "master" branch of the repository." >> I think this does not align well with how we work today (without = GitHub). E.g. >> if a group decides to use GitHub to better track changes and maybe = easily >> integrate editorial comments, but decide to have all discussion on = the mailing >> list (and not use github issues), I think it would be fully okay for = the >> editors just commit directly based on the consensus on the mailing = list. So I >> think the important part is that substantial comments should only be = committed >> with wg consensus and therefore it is a good practice to have pull = requests >> first to declare consensus based on the concrete proposed edits. = However, if a >> different way to declare consensus is used that's fine as well. In = short, I >> think the SHOULD is to string here for the general case. >=20 > I think that it greatly improves transparency, and I want to add that = WG policies could insist upon this practice, but we don't need normative = force in the two statements in this paragraph. Yes, it should not be normative but I=E2=80=99m also not sure if that = practice is the right thing for every document. Yes it greatly can = improve transparency and I agree that is is a good practice but for some = e.g. small documents it might be more overhead/=E2=80=9Cprocess = burden=E2=80=9D than really needed. So I think it would be good to = reword slightly and/or add some more emphasis that there might be cases = where it might not be needed. >=20 >> 4) Sec 5.3 (mostly editorial): [...] >> This text seems to apply more general to all content in section 5 and = should >> maybe be moved out of section 5.3. Similarly I'm not sure if section = 5..3.1 and >> 5.3.2 should actually be subsection of 5.3. The question of which = issue to >> track seem rather orthogonal to the question who resolves the issue = (I agree >> that this discussion does not make sense when no issue are tracked = like in sec >> 5.1 but it could make sense for the mode in section 5.2) >=20 > The organization here is tricky, but I do agree that this text is = generic. I've moved the piece you quoted up to the intro to Section 5. Thanks! What=E2=80=99s about 5.3.1 and 5.3.1. I would recommend to = create a new subsection there and not have these subsubsection within = 5.3. >=20 >=20 >> 5) Sec 5.3.1: >> "The risk is that >> design changes might not always reflect the consensus of the = Working >> Group." >> I know that happens, even without GitHub, but should ideally not be = the case. >> However, I think the root cause is rather that changes were = incorrectly not >> identified by the editors as requiring consensus. Maybe this can be = reworded >> accordingly to not give the impression that it is okay to implement = design >> changes in a working group without consensus. Actually this is a = broader >> problem (independent of GitHub) because some editors, especially when = they also >> have been the authors of the individual draft, often implement design = changes >> first in a new version and then ask the working group for consensus. = As I said >> that's a different issue but it could be good to mention that GitHub = and the >> use of PRs can actually help to not use this practice but always each = consensus >> first. >=20 > I've added a piece about identifying the need for consensus, that is a = good addition, but I don't see anything else actionable here. I read = the text as saying pretty much what you want it to. Thanks! I would also propose to slightly rephrase it to make it more = GitHub specific=20 "The risk is that changes that potentially contain design changes might = get merged into the working version of the document before consensus of = the Working Group is confirmed. However, transparency of these changes = is expected to still be higher compared to when documents are maintained = by the editors without any detailed change log.=E2=80=9D >=20 >> 6) Sec 5.3.1: >> "... it is likely appropriate to move >> to a more tightly controlled process." >> Maybe add something like "e.g. potentially during or after after = working group >> last call". >=20 > I don't want to prompt a particular outcome by making that sort of = suggestion. I appreciate that QUIC is weird, but it isn't THAT weird. = I've had several similar experiences in a relatively short period of = time with HTTP/2, TLS, ACME, and a few others. To be honest these groups are all =E2=80=9Cweird=E2=80=9D, or rather to = some extend similar. However, there are many groups that are much = smaller scoped or at least work on less complicated protocols or only = small protocol extensions. In all these cases the proposed tightly = controlled process might be an over-kill (at least compared to how these = group work currently without git).=20 I don=E2=80=99t think this process is the best choice in general but = rather one option. So I think it would be in general good to tone this = part maybe a bit down.=20 You can also replace =E2=80=9Clikely appropriate=E2=80=9D with =E2=80=9Cma= y be useful=E2=80=9D or something. My request is just to make this more = a suggestion that a recommendation. >=20 >> 7) Sec 5.3.2: >> " Chairs might choose to manage the process of deciding which = issues >> are substantive. For instance, chairs might reserve the ability to >> use the "design" label to new issues (see Section 5.4.1) and to = close >> issues marked as "design". Chairs should always allow document >> editors to identify and address editorial issues as they see fit." >> I guess you could also use normative language here: "MAY choose to" = and "Chairs >> SHOULD always allow" >=20 > I don't like normative clauses in a for example, but the latter seems = good. I suggested the MAY in the first sentence instead of might (which is not = an example, no?) >=20 >> 8) Sec 5.3.2: >> " As documents mature further, explicit confirmation of technical >> decisions with the Working Group mailing list becomes more = important." >> Not sure I agree here. I know what you mean but explicit confirmation = on the >> mailing list is always important. Maybe there is a way to rephrase = that (or >> just remove that sentence...?) >=20 > This is really only emphasis, but I would prefer to keep it. I=E2=80=99m concern that this sentence implies that technical design = changes do not need to be confirmed in the early phase, which I think it = just wrong. I think this is more than emphasis. >=20 >> 9) Sec 5.3.2: >> " Gaining Working Group consensus about the resolution of issues = can be >> done in the abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the >> outcome of discussions as they see fit." >> I'm actually not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify? >=20 > You can get consensus on specific language (usually in the form of a = PR in this setting) or you can gain consensus on the outline of a = design, without text. In the past, we've been quite effective at the = latter as well as the former. Specific text is more concrete, but it = can be better (particularly for documents in early stages) to just work = out a rough outline first. I believe you already revised this text based on other comments, right? = (Lost track a bit). If so, maybe you can just point me add the next = text=E2=80=A6? >=20 >> 10) Sec 5.3.2: >> " WGLC SHOULD be proposed as pull requests, and MUST be discussed = on >> the mailing list, and MUST have chairs explicitly confirm = consensus.." >> I agree with the "MUST be discussed on the mailing list" (as this is = inline >> with RFC2418 e.g. 3.2 but therefore doesn't necessarily need to be = normative in >> this doc) but find the other two SHOULD and MUST too strict. I don't = think this >> is aligned with the process we have today in groups and we should not = use this >> document to make the process more strict than it is. Especially I'm = not sure >> what "chairs MUST explicitly confirm consensus" really means and it = seems to be >> a requirement independent of GitHub and therefore eventually would = even update >> RFC2481. >=20 > How about: >=20 > Ideally, substantive changes to documents that have passed WGLC are > proposed as pull requests, and MUST be discussed on the mailing list. = Having > chairs explicitly confirm consensus on changes ensures that previous = consensus > decisions are not overturned without cause. Yes, thanks! >=20 >> 11) Sec 5.4.4: >> It might be too late for this kind of input, however, as I review the = document >> I'll note it here anyway. In taps we also have a "discuss" label to = mark issue >> that has been discussed but need further discussion e.g. at an = (interim) >> meeting. For this, one could even create a milestone to indicate at = which >> meeting more discussion should take place (or when e.g. a document is >> text-ready until when text should be provided). We/the editors also = did this >> for a while in taps. >=20 > We used labels like this in QUIC too. Then we found that project = boards were better for this. I think that someone suggested this during = WGLC and we decided not to include it. Okay. >=20 >> 12) Section 6 seems to encourage revision only in preparation for = meetings. I'm >> not sure if that is inline with our usual working practice. I mean = yes in >> reality we see the draft submission deadline as forcing function for = updates >> and there want to keep it but we also do encourage to rev documents = more often >> and work continuously, e.g. when a mayor change was implemented or a = mayor >> issue resolved. And yes this works probably better for smaller = documents but >> the section seems a bit contradicting to this practice. I mean the = reason that >> we see many updates just at the draft deadline is because editors = assign time >> to make updates to resolve issue to match the deadline. If editors = make >> continuous changes we should encourage to update more often. Maybe it = could >> rather say something like: "Revisions SHOULD be submitted as I-Ds = when a >> signification issue has been resolved. Editors MAY bundle multiple = changes in >> one revision if updates are done in timely close coherence and SHOULD = update at >> least two weeks before any meeting." However, some of this advise is = actually >> not GitHub specific and might again just touch our general guidelines = and as >> such update RFC2026 and RFC2418... >=20 > The intent here is to reiterate 2418 regarding session documents and = to encourage routine publication of snapshots. Actually it might be better to not use normative language here and = rather point to 2418. However, right now the text does not seems to = encourage routine publication of snapshots but rather it seems to = encourage to =E2=80=9Conly=E2=80=9D publish if there is a meeting. >=20 >> 13) sec 7: >> " Chairs MUST consider input from all discussion venues when = assessing >> consensus including GitHub, mailing lists, interim meetings, and = IETF >> meetings." >> This seems like an update to RFC2481 again... as maybe also some = other notes in >> this section. >=20 > If you have concrete alternatives, I'm open to tweaking. I think that = as a restatement of existing principles, this is fine as is, but I'm = sure that a different and better formulation is possible. I think it should not use normative text here and rather point to = rfc2481 instead. Maybe:=20 =E2=80=9CAs specified in RFC2481, chairs must consider input from all = discussion venues when assessing consensus. These include mailing lists, = IETF meetings, interim meetings as well as issues and discussion on = GitHub.=E2=80=9D Thanks! Mirja >=20 >=20 From nobody Thu Mar 12 12:16:40 2020 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 D23DD3A105F; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:16:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 e1uKS3bWOd8k; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:16:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg1-x542.google.com (mail-pg1-x542.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::542]) (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 BA0763A1063; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x542.google.com with SMTP id u12so3526525pgb.10; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:16:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gm4ZqWPqcwFnzJrbi8sgYRQxopldHWySVGiZaBcYZWw=; b=n68tO7UFH5A+pT3jIpgkrW3hQpBzeD/ElFJOuWiPMfRRIAJ8Bv79F/zQyskppAOaeK ag0vVbKkQUZ6E9Q567QdIpTu1AP4TdNLbYwdTVkA71teO892ktBq7YEvzS+3oayl1lbN nICskNSNCgcdapeTV9/+FS+cy1aiKSaA1H20leJTjd8t928/9ZkUiDA1Fd6uuuDPzXCK sKYnY7zncqOaVcHlQNxZAYpdu5oGeOgN0U0IWn/3j5zCbur0eNeTrFO6ulM7uWaGM7ir +ez/a9LxGm5Bzm4DINyDjuNwEg7R0wHX0TBxBloPvTViWCvAg8vPx/oeV/vhpWJIc5EB 1R9Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=gm4ZqWPqcwFnzJrbi8sgYRQxopldHWySVGiZaBcYZWw=; b=KzMnagMLDYx2EVs8M0pso0iRdJHilk6yGB4xtuD2u0LfrTrP3I3JWZq4g6D9Aozs/3 hZYDQGbRh5l9V3kmoCVeui7T+y8N89Ki5SRU7l5GpCkfBirKOFrntkV8XOEZiA5hDTJ0 S3Oamvmww2ztVDlpdoQ5Orqp3YgvLZPPjSRQfIhCAugI3k0GdiMmW/3LvMcpnb1Ajoph PuNeqo6NNOHr3Jy8dl7cuWogb7juHUmEbhiO1aUzzr4z9YnuzzPRRgGfMlLc32TI7Cbd 3bj9rm9R1ab/LH5dflccyxEU/P9y7h035VZX3Z3mtpZvfOaVdejUlr8mtHoVW9nLy4Zc RwXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ366789/mRlCEjeRFurEqmnEO4ZyEa0U8WlUi8Nz9Rwqav3lgPs VFLrds1dmW0KQUBAMCtQcHw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vswWSfHRn8oPzdswtnhuYX8eHnyonEgqTyzoSL95R4R66QIaKB+Kx8v+6ZqkIRucMsRegfNfA== X-Received: by 2002:a65:6147:: with SMTP id o7mr9512768pgv.442.1584040591090; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.25.143]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w9sm2186352pfd.94.2020.03.12.12.16.27 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:16:30 -0700 (PDT) To: Alissa Cooper , Alvaro Retana Cc: IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 08:16:26 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 19:16:34 -0000 To be precise, my review said: > Is this draft intended to become part of BCP25? I think it would be > useful for the IESG to clarify this rather than leave it to the RFC Edi= tor. I intentionally didn't express an opinion. Brian On 13-Mar-20 01:40, Alissa Cooper wrote: > I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian suggested it so= I added the note. I=E2=80=99m happy to remove the note if necessary.=20 >=20 > Alissa >=20 >=20 >> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana wr= ote: >> >> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> >> >> Brian: >> >> Hi! >> >> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------= -- >>>> DISCUSS: >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------= -- >>>> >>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this docume= nt as a >>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF com= munity. >>>> >>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >>>> >>>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Sta= ndards >>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether w= orking >>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support th= eir >>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. >>>> >>>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working G= roup >>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it rep= resents >>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision "to= use >>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their discret= ion.." >>> >>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction help= ? >> >> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having this >> document be part of BCP 25. >> >> >> >> .... >>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this docum= ent >>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be p= art of >>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to = discuss >>>> this topic. >>> >>> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP number?= ) was >>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with a b= it of >>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community discuss= ion, of >>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). >> >> No, I don't think things have changed. In this case, the AD added a >> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to BCP= >> 25 at the time of publication." >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ >> >> >> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies >> directly to WG operation. The intention of adding documents to it >> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. >> >> >> Thanks! >> >> Alvaro. >> >=20 > . >=20 From nobody Thu Mar 12 12:42:15 2020 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 7AD033A07A0; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:40:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 oZOZ9FrIFX3k; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:40:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (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 2F4663A07AD; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:40:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049462.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02CJVL6Q005105; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:40:55 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2yqt9v9wps-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:40:55 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 02CJerfr006907; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:40:54 -0400 Received: from zlp30484.vci.att.com (zlp30484.vci.att.com [135.47.91.179]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 02CJeoWE006805 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:40:50 -0400 Received: from zlp30484.vci.att.com (zlp30484.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30484.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 403314009E6E; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:40:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.155]) by zlp30484.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 2A3724009E6F; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:40:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGEX1CC.ITServices.sbc.com (135.50.89.110) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com (130.8.218.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:40:49 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGEX1CB.ITServices.sbc.com (135.50.89.109) by GAALPA1MSGEX1CC.ITServices.sbc.com (135.50.89.110) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:40:49 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGEX1CB.ITServices.sbc.com ([135.50.89.109]) by GAALPA1MSGEX1CB.ITServices.sbc.com ([135.50.89.109]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:40:49 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "'Salz, Rich'" , "'Eric Rescorla'" , "'Mark Nottingham'" CC: "'ietf-and-github@ietf.org'" , "'The IESG'" , "'Martin Thomson'" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV+AR2LNluzWvq602WNl5e0D/0wKhEXRCAgADM5ICAABtZYA== Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:40:48 +0000 Message-ID: References: <158386231480.15427.9414945774814479191@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B1EB2AE-EB48-48FF-BA20-DBB5527ECF1E@cooperw.in> <894D3C1A-ED57-44D5-8099-92C221258C99@akamai.com> <1735a4fe-0a9a-4952-aefc-5b16200639d2@www.fastmail.com> <4B24E202-B2ED-491B-A7AF-9D0955C6C1D7@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.245.102] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-12_13:2020-03-11, 2020-03-12 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1011 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003120096 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 19:41:06 -0000 Pj4gSSBhZ3JlZSB3aXRoIE1hcnRpbiBoZXJlOiB0aGUgcG9pbnQgb2YgaGF2aW5nIHRoaXMgZ28g dGhyb3VnaCBhIFdHIGFuZCBjb25zZW5zdXMgaXMgdGhhdCB3ZSB0aGluayB0aGF0IGlmIHlvdSBh cmUgdXNpbmcgR2l0aHViIHRoaXMgaXMgYSBnb29kIHNldCBvZiBwcmFjdGljZXMgYW5kIHRoYXQg d2UgcmVjb21tZW5kIHRoZW0gaW4gdGhhdCBjYXNlLiBTbyB3aGlsZSBpdCdzIGF0IHRoZWlyIGRp c2NyZXRpb24gdGhhdCBkb2Vzbid0IG1lYW4gd2UgZG9uJ3QgaGF2ZSBhbiBvcGluaW9uLg0KDQo+ IFRoZXJlIHdlcmUgYWxzbyByZWFsIGNvbmNyZXRlIGltcHJvdmVtZW50cyB0aGF0IGNhbWUgYWJv dXQgYmVjYXVzZSBvZiB0aGUgV0cgcHJvY2Vzcy7CoCBUaGUgbW9zdCBub3RhYmxlIGV4YW1wbGUg aXMgdGhlIOKAnGxpZ2h0IHdlaWdodOKAnSBtb2RlLCB0aGF0IGN1bG1pbmF0ZWQgaW4gQmFyYmFy YSBiZWluZyBhZGRlZCBhcyBjby1hdXRob3IuwqAgTm8gYW1vdW50IG9mIHByZXNlbnRhdGlvbnMg YXQgdGhlIHdnY2hhaXJzIGx1bmNoIGNvdWxkIGhhdmUgYWNoaWV2ZWQgdGhhdC4NCg0KSSBqdXN0 IG5vdyBtYW5hZ2VkIHRvIGdldCB0aHJvdWdoIGFsbCBteSBlbWFpbHMgZnJvbSB5ZXN0ZXJkYXkg YW5kIHRvZGF5IGFuZCB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRvIHBvc3Qgc29tZXRoaW5nIHF1aWNrbHkgYmVmb3Jl IGl0IGdldHMgb3ZlcnRha2VuIGJ5IG90aGVycycgY29tbWVudHMuDQpGaXJzdCBvZiBhbGwsIEkg dGhpbmsgTWFydGluIGlzIGRvaW5nIGEgZmFidWxvdXMgam9iIGFuZCBmdWxseSBzdXBwb3J0IGFs bCB0aGUgY2hhbmdlcyBoZSdzIG1hZGUuIElmIGhlIGV2ZXIgZG9lcyBzb21ldGhpbmcgSSAqZG9u J3QqIHN1cHBvcnQsIEknbGwgbWFrZSBpdCBrbm93bi4gDQpBcyBzb21lb25lIHdpdGggc3Ryb25n IHRlbmRlbmNpZXMgdG8gcHJhZ21hdGlzbSwgSSB0aGluayB0aGUgbW9zdCBpbXBvcnRhbnQgdGhp bmcgaXMgdG8gZ2V0IHRoZXNlIHJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucyBvdXQuIFdHcyBhcmUgdXNpbmcgR2l0 SHViLiBJbmRlcGVuZGVudCBvZiB0aGUgZXhpc3RlbmNlIG9mIG90aGVyIGdpdCBtZWNoYW5pc21z IChJIHJlYWxseSBsaWtlIHRoZSBBdGxhc3NpYW4gc3VpdGUgb2YgdG9vbHMsIHdpdGggSmlyYSBh bmQgQmFtYm9vIGludGVncmF0aW9uIC0tIGJ1dCB0aGV5IHRvdGFsbHkgcmVxdWlyZSBzb21lb25l IHRvIGFkbWluaXN0ZXIgdGhlbSksIEdpdEh1YiBpcyB3aGF0IG1hbnkgV0dzIGFyZSB1c2luZyAo dG8gdmFyaW91cyBkZWdyZWUpLiBJbmRlcGVuZGVudCBvZiB0aGUgZmFjdCB0aGF0IEdpdEh1YiBv bmx5IHJ1bnMgb24gSVB2NCwgV0dzIGFyZSB1c2luZyBHaXRIdWIuIEEgZG9nbWF0aWMgc3RhbmNl IG9mICJiZWNhdXNlIEdpdEh1YiBpcyBJUHY0LW9ubHkgSUVURiBNVVNUIE5PVCBwcm92aWRlIGd1 aWRhbmNlIG9yIHRvb2xzIHRvIHRoZSBXR3MgdGhhdCBhcmUgdXNpbmcgaXQiIHdvdWxkIGJlIGJl eW9uZCBteSBjb21wcmVoZW5zaW9uLiBBbnkgc3VnZ2VzdGlvbiB0aGF0IElFVEYgZm9yYmlkIHVz ZSBvZiBHaXRIdWIgaXMgdW50ZW5hYmxlLCBJTU8uDQoNClRoZXJlZm9yZSwgZ3VpZGFuY2UgKmZv ciB0aG9zZSBXR3MgbWFraW5nIHVzZSBvZiBHaXRIdWIqIGlzIG5lZWRlZC4gQW5kIHRoYXQncyB3 aGF0IHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgcHJvdmlkZXMuIEknbSBub3Qgc3VyZSBob3cgbWFueSBkaWZmZXJlbnQg d2F5cyB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IGNhbiBzYXkgdGhhdCBpdCBpc24ndCByZXF1aXJpbmcgb3IgZm9yY2lu ZyBhbnkgV0cgdG8gdXNlIEdILiBBbmQgaXQgaXNuJ3QgcmVxdWlyaW5nIG9yIGZvcmNpbmcgdGhv c2Ugd2hvIGRvIHVzZSBHSCBpbiBzaW1wbGlzdGljIHdheXMgKGUuZy4sIGp1c3QgZHJhZnQgYXV0 aG9ycyBtYWtlIHVzZSBvZiBpdCBhbmQgb3RoZXIgbGlzdCBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudHMgZG9uJ3QpIHRv IGluc3RpdHV0ZSBoZWF2eS1oYW5kZWQgcG9saWNpZXMuIEkgdXNlIEdIIHdpdGggYSBjby1hdXRo b3Igd2l0aG91dCBXRy1jaGFpci1ibGVzc2luZyBpbiBvbmUgV0cuIEluIGEgV0cgSSBjaGFpciwg b25lIHNldCBvZiBkcmFmdCBhdXRob3JzIGlzIHVzaW5nIGEgcmVwb3NpdG9yeSBpbiBhbiBhY2Nv dW50IEkgc2V0IHVwIGZvciB0aGUgV0c7IG5vLW9uZSBlbHNlIGlzIHBhcnRpY2lwYXRpbmcgdGhl cmUsIGFuZCB0aGUgb3RoZXIgZHJhZnQgYXV0aG9yIGNob3NlIG5vdCB0byB1c2UgR0guIFRoaXMg aXMgYWxsIHBlcmZlY3RseSBvayB1bmRlciB0aGUgcHJvdmlkZWQgZ3VpZGFuY2UuDQoNCkJUVywg SSBkb24ndCAoY29tcGV0ZW50bHkpIHdyaXRlIGNvZGUuIFdoZW4gSSB3YXMgZmlyc3QgZm9yY2Vk IHRvIHN0YXJ0IHVzaW5nIGdpdCAoZm9yIGRvY3VtZW50IG1hbmFnZW1lbnQsIGluIEJyb2FkYmFu ZCBGb3J1bSksIGl0IGV2b2tlZCBzaWduaWZpY2FudGx5IG1vcmUgdGVycm9yIGluIG1lIHRoYW4s IHNheSBjcmF3bGluZyB0aHJvdWdoIGEgY2F2ZSBvciByYXBwZWxsaW5nIG9mZiBhIDMwIG0gY2xp ZmYuIEJ1dCBpdCdzIHdoZXJlIHRoaW5ncyBhcmUgaGVhZGVkLiBUaGUgbW9yZSBhZHZpY2UgYW5k IHVzZWZ1bCBpbmZvIHdlIGNhbiBwcm92aWRlLCB0aGUgYmV0dGVyIG9mZiBldmVyeW9uZSB3aWxs IGJlLg0KDQpJIGhvbmVzdGx5IGRvbid0IGNhcmUgd2hhdCBsYWJlbCBpcyBhdHRhY2hlZCB0byBp dC4gVGhlIGFkdmljZSBpcyB1c2VmdWwgZm9yIHRob3NlIHVzaW5nIEdILiBUaGVyZWZvcmUsIEkn bSBjb25maWRlbnQgaXQgd2lsbCBiZSB1c2VkLg0KQmFyYmFyYQ0K From nobody Thu Mar 12 13:46:29 2020 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 A85C93A0909 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:46:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.07 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.07 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, SPOOFED_FREEMAIL=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7qlA9Lzz_1IQ for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 3C1163A090A for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:46:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CKkNAt024154 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:46:23 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id B3A2E20801A for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:46:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9008208011 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:46:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.11.240.7] ([10.11.240.7]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 02CKkNYS029774 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:46:23 +0100 To: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" From: Alexandre Petrescu Message-ID: <5c7de7cc-883a-5e4e-5f7e-4baa114b0bee@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:46:23 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------CCFFEF7123DB97A06259BD70" Content-Language: fr Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] last post X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 20:46:28 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------CCFFEF7123DB97A06259BD70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Thank you for my brief exchanges on this WG. I learned a lot, for example how to put accents in xml on xml2rfc (whether on github or not). I thank. I proposed a few things about IPv6 and github.com but dont seem get through. I stop here and unsubscribe. Alex --------------CCFFEF7123DB97A06259BD70 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi,

Thank you for my brief exchanges on this WG.

I learned a lot, for example how to put accents in xml on xml2rfc (whether on github or not). I thank.

I proposed a few things about IPv6 and github.com but dont seem get through.

I stop here and unsubscribe.

Alex

--------------CCFFEF7123DB97A06259BD70-- From nobody Thu Mar 12 15:05:16 2020 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 EA6A53A0840; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:04:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=IKwuqKAz; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Pkd92mtt 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 VEELrcVX7TgV; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:04:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F1B93A0849; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:04:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF8D21FD7; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 18:04:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 18:04:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=ty 4yUgN818ZYlErESWlNWB/9h3G+geirQkGJjJH8jPo=; b=IKwuqKAzMY01eR+nCo T8S1pAecwHd+147x4SOtV9AVWv4nge7+PlDGWYn3JIKMyc09YuQNt5cjll25vnsM mHz7Ex+DJa0BUvOPAV/T11w4YjbYBKz6M2YHdshT61EZ/I9CVILfLygDtrlZkltX AYI1TVR9LjhpGtwk1TKWqmg1+M9HObjdLe2xSGhG3BQvzGklq4/DNxRSBz28bKVD 5XsFc0yAU/ekZBUzDT79l8ULWWf+SN3eKZd99xc3DRhF+amYGyzCpI+N+tKjpGGL cmFsvnZzTuojeQRVzA6sSJMoisbTIdt7BZMauAFAxskGBgerpAwmlzC5f5/Dpfqn 671A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=ty4yUgN818ZYlErESWlNWB/9h3G+geirQkGJjJH8j Po=; b=Pkd92mtt5rgeGREKpCaAkKa2ThkmM1mNxXuNsDNhQo8CgsuCBKlnlKzWe KxLn3Y0s+TlBw3nzd+2R5+WDXUUsE6eHNgL8xe8dECqs3axarjDeOwxKVF5Vd+zP Jc7VDIkwdsYe+qFoc4WxXlq5JBSxwIJSNl+ahwRE7KLY7cMY81ajmKITRuwD0VG8 d9kiUKEV6UVWF3GjJe/wTBywutyh4BwZnJpClGv9g7vuAdpVz33b7xWjjqbqdvbl hNlb73XVXUqZU2/hXN65JxTpoje3LJ5J6Zbz/SDTA5xKFMNif+nr+QWDunWhmfLF 0WHLUvhevKqCDPnNFcrVnKOanAIiA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvhedgudehkecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtgfesthhqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdfo rghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqne cuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecu rfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id C852FE00A2; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 18:04:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <158399301327.19705.8890772742138829164@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158399301327.19705.8890772742138829164@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:04:33 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Roman Danyliw" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Roman_Danyliw=27s_No_Objection_on_dr?= =?utf-8?q?aft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 12 Mar 2020 22:04:56 -0000 On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 17:03, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote: > ** Section 10. As there are no plans to formally backup anything beyo= nd the > repos and the mail, the mitigation of =E2=80=9C[t]ools exist for extra= cting this > information for backup=E2=80=9D seems weak. One of the real appeals o= f GitHub is that > information/those services and their respective integrations. Hence, = what are > those tools? Who should take responsibility for that backup (if anyon= e)? Why > aren=E2=80=99t they being backed up? https://github.com/rjsparks/github-backup-sow should address that. I also have a tool that backs up some of this information from GH. Mike= Bishop is making it much better. From nobody Thu Mar 12 17:52:49 2020 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 045713A0B5C; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 17:52:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=lYXaLXpB; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=vTacGoHy 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 4HncktJaa7a8; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 17:52:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D1CB3A0B48; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 17:52:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 574BC21ED1; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:52:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:52:39 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=JffxdDITg2GxkHcXWjZ1XxhGfVcH d6tXjBIMzc03NE4=; b=lYXaLXpBO2gLCA1KHSsJD9N5skZUO3aYzDjj9WxIi3a7 Ou6XzrOKiMQ56UJf1dRbFeCdAYkfjlziNC5xeuRKIt4OFqGqdJ/zKa+fCHOOrh+p mDpOLpTwfh9UIrf8v9oIW4kGDdzEsAywiCiwx9yTnYHQDjZwRp0a1g5J9W7efN0J Fj7nHYy7X/8XxR6df7mRHkGYgBiOpXwosash8gD+6dd1u6CeMsevQTsiBhmgLW06 4zdCH0VEn3us1NMF3OOjlYECLnNh+bnhYL4F2YVrd0j0RA/M7h6m2PtzujYrwbmx 3/PZnUXaJeelQlGQVRQtQboZJQ1hJsqA3KFyxeuSCA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=JffxdD ITg2GxkHcXWjZ1XxhGfVcHd6tXjBIMzc03NE4=; b=vTacGoHyXab47mJ1fYRbK8 F/SB36a5SD6EG64GOC49slB/JoV33z3XCe3fkR+lW0hECl3ui+3z3ofgBI28yQHp FxvV74630TZ5Mlb/BJhi9FwLRG8jdJ05C3LSB+mWhCINKZF90RIfdY+M2hVoPGC2 NLt5Fg7Gci2KmNKTHeHDYVIThq1Wx4U3RKqwq2WdPg99a9dAy5osZuaXuw2VXh6C 6RndZvvuHwvb6rK5uUXp/eAHLrIHyBacD68Zw7m7Foi0Ipwp1fqChaTSPxNr2CXg QCurkH28ytdp7XeN3/RsDSSZb2+gyryPAKYI18AQVyIeerUlKsTltTidQru/4epw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddviedgvdeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne goufhushhpvggtthffohhmrghinhculdegledmnecujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffu tgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomh htsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrihho pdhgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmh grihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 89F45E00A2; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:52:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <67d5daba-c463-4b93-bd7d-54991ae2c29a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <158401979264.18068.9716500170360894296@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158401979264.18068.9716500170360894296@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 11:52:20 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Suresh Krishnan" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Suresh_Krishnan=27s_No_Objection_on_?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 00:52:42 -0000 On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 00:29, Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker wrote: > There is only one thing I would like to > propose. In Section 6 regarding I-D publication it would be good if there is a > recommendation (for chairs/editors) to summarize the issues addressed by the > revision especially for the benefit of the WG participants who don't use github. I think that's a very good suggestion. What we've found is that this isn't worse than before, but there is potentially an increase in the rate of change that motivates better reporting to the WG. In QUIC, we use a combination of things, but changelogs are the most heavily relied upon (I know, because I get lots of feedback about my frequent screwups). All other such efforts have relied on the same basic mechanism. That to me suggests the following, added to Section 4.3 (https://ietf-gitwg.github.io/using-github/draft-ietf-git-using-github.html#name-monitoring-activity), not Section 6: > Additionally, clear reporting about the changes that were included in each revision of an Internet-Draft helps ensure that contributors are able to follow activity. This might be achieved by requesting that editors provide a change log that captures substantive changes to the document in each revision. Does that sound reasonable? https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/50 From nobody Thu Mar 12 19:56:21 2020 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 709A13A0E87; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:56:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=I/TLqnxH; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=18H/iiji 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 cIleSPGdbm2I; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:56:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE2B83A0E84; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 19:56:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C172922614; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 22:56:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 22:56:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=EH IBIekC0Zwmz7rX33Pc8RIAe3BVbp8zRdD0VJxU7ak=; b=I/TLqnxHCZbaRw7RWc wLzu1xejJBAFePV1Vayid7Vxg+M1WcKJXx+0aZFh2bxn9ZEml9UtSwhjdUooAxkV pvk0A89D/JvHMmOELsovbPmfEJGaqdV14AENto02epqJDvnmz97Ffmt/9hz23tdG Zd8tWbThomOEORepF1ieDVQNB8DrQScLsBxqsjSy1/XtGB+XJItQNMEGEtmCAxWC 4RoTqEjJ9iEvrMCXSrQrhKP9frwBA1SMq52kcVpa/+xR3W6Off6sJuHCBOoLqbYn CfK4PMP2VseMKAcuZfaDS+OOmnuNWkprQboFV731Gt3x9wHrTvfXfRrpUUWueizw 1/1A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=EHIBIekC0Zwmz7rX33Pc8RIAe3BVbp8zRdD0VJxU7 ak=; b=18H/iijiAPv5FkmT7HLs2Ub8LbikKRw32z4Ko9oHBrMh6KowsE4DZ1QmZ KV1YK4tNuh2+Tx3IG3Eld/UNFLMLUW06xb9PmexFh2aO4WEaAuYJFwkpRp7y9Ncs tqiPDPkmrDVQ8ltwHnszr5zfnaGuZD944ajqSsZBqP76oxkv+EMavw67MOvqxDvY BfK4BUw4j4Fw8zmbHoCM2FpNsLrLfXnpkGkht9VgTizcu4wbFpz9ZX20aEo7Vhz7 wG0rRyiDXCvAf5ZX3Y+27iKBi49jXeWWs/B4i4Rf/WxhAR7hfYskjYQQsOZU3rLA +h7ut/sXG6+5WrYI83TOObwAhptqw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddviedgheduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfr rghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3B8DAE00EE; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 22:56:15 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <158399640667.19763.6579678147144027590@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158399640667.19763.6579678147144027590@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:55:55 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "'Benjamin Kaduk'" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Benjamin_Kaduk=27s_No_Objection_on_d?= =?utf-8?q?raft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 02:56:20 -0000 Hi Ben, Thanks for the close reading and constructive feedback. I've opened a PR based on your comments: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/u= sing-github/pull/52 I have snipped out those comments that appear to be editorial in nature = to concentrate on the substantive matters. On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 18:00, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote: > In the vein of other comments, are we providing "best practices" > (Abstract) or "guidelines" (Introduction")? In the abstract (not the Abstract), this was always written with the int= ent of being a set of guidelines. Following those guidelines would be a= best practice (though perhaps not a Best Practice that is also Current)= . What I'm saying is that I realize that the distinction between these is = important and I think that the determination about whether this is a BCP= or Informational (we're headed toward the latter, I believe) shapes tha= t. I will propose a change to the abstract and intended status to that = effect. https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/51 > Section 2.1 >=20 > Organizations are a way of forming groups of contributors on GitHub= . > Each Working Group SHOULD create a new organization for the Working= > Group. A Working Group organization SHOULD be named consistently s= o > that it can be found. For instance, the name could be ietf- > wg-, as recommended in [GH-CONFIG]. >=20 > I'm not sure I understand why the recommended value for consistency is= > given in the Informational document as opposed to the BCP. I think that is because that's a tactical concern and not one that bears= on the general guidance. I am OK with the current location of that tex= t. (BTW, this threw me because I couldn't find this text where I was lookin= g.) > A single organization SHOULD NOT be used for all IETF activity, or > all activity within an area. Large organizations create too much > overhead for general management tasks, particularly when there is a= > need to maintain membership. >=20 > Is this a membership list or membership that's synchronized with > something else, or ...? I've just cut that clause. It was just odd. > We seem to have introduced the github concept of "team" in passing her= e; > a more prominent note might be helpful. I did that, but in checking on this, I found that this has changed quite= a bit since this text was originally written. So for the sake of trans= parency (and I'm hoping that it doesn't change too much more in the futu= re), this is what I have now: > Within an organization, members can be grouped into teams that are col= lectively given privileges with respect to repositories. A team with "A= dmin" access to repositories SHOULD be created for the Working Group Cha= irs and any Working Group Secretary. Note that the note about not being able to push no longer applies (this = was a feature of the previous, now non-existent system, I think). > that new contributors need. The README SHOULD contain a link to th= e > CONTRIBUTING file. >=20 > Should/can the README contain anything else? Not formally, no. Though it routinely might include other things, like = explain what the document is for, or link to the document. > Section 3 >=20 > Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub fo= r > anything more than managing drafts. >=20 > I think I saw another comment about this bit (but probably not all the= > replies); it seems like the intent is more along the lines of "issue > tracker" type things than "slides for WG sessions", so clarification i= s > in order. Yes, that text was updated in response to Barry. The consultation recom= mendation is now limited to when it comes to moving issue discussion to = GitHub. See https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/commit/e74ba457d= e2f0843a42c1214bec0033f559f187a =20 > Section 3.1 >=20 > Working Group policies need to be set with the goal of improving > transparency, participation, and ultimately the quality of the > consensus behind documents. At times, it might be appropriate to >=20 > Is there an example of how the policies might affect quality of > consensus. (Also, does "quality of the documents" or even "quality of= > the protocol being documented" not matter?) I don't know whether you think that this needs text, but my view is that= what we've seen in some of these efforts is greater alignment on the sp= ecific phrasing of text. That doesn't necessarily mean that text is goo= d (or right). That is not something that is receptive to an objective a= nalysis. But the fact that you can litigate every apostrophe has improv= ed the quantity of consensus, and the quality of it too. OK, that was perhaps a little cynical. I think that this can improve th= e quality of the underlying product as well, but it is not clear that th= e process actually cares about that. Dammit, that was cynical too. I think you are right, quality of documen= ts is probably enough (as this is not limited to protocol specifications= , I will avoid mentioning those specifically, but leave it as implicit).= =20 > Section 3.4 >=20 > In addition to the canonical XML format [RFC7991], document editors= >=20 > [I'll channel Julian Reschke and note that RFC 7991 does not describe > the exact XML vocabulary used for the canonical RFC output...] Hm. Julian is of course correct, but it's a technical kind of correctne= ss that tends not to leave room for making statements that depend on the= intent of the document, which this is. > Section 5.2 >=20 > In addition to managing documents, the Working Group might choose t= o > use GitHub for tracking outstanding issues. In this mode of > interaction, all substantive technical discussions are tracked as > issues in the issue tracker. However, discussion of any substantia= l >=20 > Is it the discussions themselves that are tracked, or the existence of= > the topic being discussed? It's the existence of the issue. I've tweaked that language (and some o= f the latter text) to better align with that view. > Section 5.3.1 >=20 > review. Finally, process checkpoints like Working Group Last Call > (WGLC; Section 7.4 of [RFC2418]) provides additional safeguards > against abuse. >=20 > This section is "Early Design Phases"; would a document move directly > from "early design phase" to WGLC without some other intermediate step= > which would allow for detection of such abuse? (In light of the > following paragraph perhaps the best approach is to change the name us= ed > to describe this phase.) In response to Mirja, most of the following text was moved; see https://= github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/45 . I haven't read her followu= p yet, but more might come. However, as this is in response to a partic= ular issue that only really arises from the interaction style under disc= ussion, I don't see an easy way to resolve this without more restructuri= ng and I'm disinclined to do that now as that could be too disruptive (I= don't want this to be the reason, but there are also 10 PRs open with k= nown conflicts to resolve). > Section 5.4 >=20 > Working Groups or editors might use additional labels as they choos= e. > Any label that is used as part of a process requires that the proce= ss > be documented and announced by Working Group chairs. Editors SHOUL= D > be permitted to use labels to manage issues without any formal > process significance being attached to those issues. >=20 > Is there some conflict between "WG chairs must document and announce > process" and "editors are permitted to use labels without any formal > process significance"? I'm not really sure I understand what this is > trying to say. No conflict. I was hoping that is was clear that semantics might be ass= igned to a set labels (editorial/design for instance), but that other la= bels should remain usable for other purposes. > Section 6 >=20 > This creates a stable snapshot and makes the content of the in- > progress document available to a wider audience. Documents submitt= ed >=20 > Is "wider audience" code for "the traditional IETF mode of work"? Stu= ff > on github seems ... pretty available, as does the I-D archive; it's ha= rd > to have much confidence in a claim that one has a "wider audience" tha= n > the other. Yes. It is recognizing that there are some people who prefer to consume= things in a particular format and that those people might not be consid= ered part of the audience who consume the GitHub versions. I always use= the editor's copy of drafts on GitHub where possible, but I have heard = that others, particularly those who track things less closely, might pre= fer not to have to deal with a moving target. In terms of the claim, I think that it's accurate, as long as the audien= ce for an I-D is not a strict subset of the audience for the content pro= vided on GitHub, then A=E2=88=AAB > A. =20 > If permitted, GitHub will be used for technical discussion and > decisions, especially during early stages of development of a > document. Any decisions are ultimately confirmed through review, a= nd > ultimately, through Working Group Last Call (see Section 7.4 of > [RFC2418]). >=20 > I'm not sure I understand what is meant by "review". added "...within the WG". =20 > I agree with Roman that it's surprising to mention that tools for > backing up "other information" exist but not make any recommendation f= or > their usage. Added a stronger recommendation to backup. That is happening anyway. > We could perhaps mention the potential consequences due to > authentication breach at github (minimal, due to distributed backups a= nd > the I-D archive). I will mention that. Thanks. From nobody Thu Mar 12 20:08:11 2020 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 B93CD3A0EB1; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:08:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=QHPV6+vr; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Y/EoL4jr 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 Agq55FUhh1xe; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:08:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 219FC3A0EB0; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:08:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DC6E22538; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:08:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:08:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=c31eE1iQshqcVmQa4hB02TSmawBf PCzyEQGYXZXXuRs=; b=QHPV6+vre0fCl+c/qH3cpWoubXcgyhO6rZwKnXJE+pK7 dN+KQwD092MRnG3StPcLSIrDN7lV5bVr924MaxyjQpaa14DA5nfWMEi6i3wfg8F+ 1CfuWFvzten5Vn4vtyBlihm6IVLdE+QqBTFpTXHv7ZcDIbZPhiaoMHZWo3JVYRq/ hGHSlafs+VCV4YJA2c9rYubEMLnxZPIPNUUpyxzvf9A01DfSn8hV1d783CxbsZRb g8xKH5B05UQi0ELzHx2gb5ls+eVpvm5OLi2egMmIKClS3kbkA5Fd0tf1Dg1tcRV8 Ceq6kRFetxBGpqjOS2Wcubf7r75cfpGBp9sym+iBdg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=c31eE1 iQshqcVmQa4hB02TSmawBfPCzyEQGYXZXXuRs=; b=Y/EoL4jrucovzN6dzPCmgA gIt74pSDtoYb0obL5ukqZO3GTsMEbCWxKqmKyfwO2kh+qAcA8Uf4DGoIaGnScrU1 /mWJoJ3vTZHFflA5jzULgtKsMufYOUp9WzPlTMv69aMflmoewD2uzPedKek4Jgr8 /eRuXS93L8S5/1E5twQ0z7LOU1xY8DekaYLjhjPawnYB0ynPH/pMsM643RMWCYG3 TRjp0Y7M4AzLD/Q8LkMYi+PeOMctUdSBQFZqoLcXK/nQU/jTdmBNIKSvR86hBCaD I3uHQl6XIpAB27bgLONgLHESVoyhr0wF9hQUm2By29ITgDUXpPYhRgRjYjeLFHUQ == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddviedgheegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id EBA27E00A2; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:08:00 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <158401045464.18284.15108949717034351202@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158401045464.18284.15108949717034351202@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:07:39 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Alexey Melnikov" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, "Francesca Palombini" , "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Alexey_Melnikov=27s_Yes_on_draft-iet?= =?utf-8?q?f-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 03:08:05 -0000 HI Francesca (and Alexey), On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 21:54, Alexey Melnikov via Datatracker wrote: > I see the value of the document stating: "if you use GitHub, this is the best > practice, if you want to follow it." The document motivates covering GitHub by > stating that it has "a very large community of contributors". I still think > some additional considerations should be there about using other services, > possibly having IETF hosting a git server, even by saying "it is out of scope > of this document" (implying it might be covered by a different BCP?). As has been reiterated elsewhere, this is something that the charter and working group covered extensively. There are many lamentable things about the current situation, but I believe that this approach has consensus already. > Section 4.1 "When deciding to use GitHub..." > I'd like a sentence saying that WG chairs SHOULD evaluate over time and MAY > change these policies based on the WG experience. I do think what described in > this document is very valuable, but let's not forget that each WG is different > and might need to make tweaks on the way, to get the best out of it. -- Just > reached Section 5 where this is stated. Still think it would be good to have it > in Section 4.1 as well. I've tweaked Section 3.1, which says: Chairs SHOULD periodically consult with document editors ++and the Working Group++ to ensure that policies are effective. The extra piece here is in https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/53 From nobody Thu Mar 12 20:10:51 2020 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 19B783A0EC6; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:10:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=ecVvfRFb; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=2yBF5bGB 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 7Hx2P-v0fG7o; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:10:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A57EF3A0EC3; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:10:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E399D2238E; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:10:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:10:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=jDwty46hBeS1PT3+dg+vlZhb0L1o 17FtZ0gbZ591oCQ=; b=ecVvfRFb/TdvyQjb6Ge+ByON9hkTHQnNE6heCJUdSuYj 5NzkI8S2vc06qRJxBq6R798gHnWSztsO77iMtTc5GIjtMC7u0v4PzLqJH4fBplnd 7VhqU5P0sv5AmC9xcYeY4K2p3LusFVn+T9PcJCWgKxDNbNzZz1gfZCtrwGJjHSyo FpKVruIJ8po61x1DfkiQHVt4Dbpb8/0VfunRJHJOsYurZiYZuiidafiAjpBNQX/u HcCUo0etOWZabEarkEg1QbuJ3e7WfsCVaruTAjEX9zInpvVEgNzLr2K2u0CqNf7e fF0uxBm9zghlxySjUdTmcaSaEoDZKdkFmgssKkEolg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=jDwty4 6hBeS1PT3+dg+vlZhb0L1o17FtZ0gbZ591oCQ=; b=2yBF5bGBnDLPPM6wD3mrLq 7ynBpW9rCRtJGTxYPuPJzt2IDPPj2xOCRzJuGL5TzRaXUKUllw4RBsJAXuBOR61O sP6fJYrx4647HnOD9/OEc0Zgrkr2DDpOlVdn3mce8BwGqJRIhk/Cimvsbs485UhC 24Hul/+TSxzusW1hJW4IzB9PnvEncZir1RI3Kpe2F0iE2ZuKRi1ayzZihzaecDs1 wpXUBwez5fURvWvqM3+5PXRsZ90xNCqyuPqXTBGgDGs2VYPMzl4ztngQg38CroEE bahH7X6/hziZ0mQ8vg9at5z7mMQXdS+5nVAsO/r60SjDzY1GUoM77/xFky7rza6A == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddviedgheegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedunecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2D752E00A2; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:10:42 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <9322ba71-dd46-4c8c-aca5-78928c631e19@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <158401082788.18076.104688218811852864@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <158401082788.18076.104688218811852864@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:10:21 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Martin Vigoureux" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Martin_Vigoureux=27s_No_Objection_on?= =?utf-8?q?_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 03:10:46 -0000 Hi Martin, On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 22:00, Martin Vigoureux via Datatracker wrote: > What I'd really like to see is some clarifications added such that it is clear > that these recommandations are not for all IETF WGs. Without adding a caveat to every recommendation, do you think that the changes in https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46/files address your central concern? Those are very prominent statements and I believe that they will help establish the right expectations. From nobody Thu Mar 12 20:37:55 2020 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 4D0BE3A0F38; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:37:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=atBB53/J; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=tBomrfKf 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 omc2jTPM7KEs; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:37:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B0E33A082B; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:37:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DDD022114; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:37:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:37:45 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=gI etJ7J38I75mDuj3KjdocgNEgQePJ2HS7QSYLcY3TM=; b=atBB53/J33Sf3zf96d X4mdpdmUHWe8Yzp4XvA953RALIM1UxNCU/ocvOq3FTT1DFvyousYN5KUZggo9c1f OcFltLZCnZ2jeukFSvsqbpK1kBnxK0Gh4tqcwtI/aFBIZd8ZO/UnJqBHWd777GrF t6B36MPbd92OjjMD4S40/hbbG8UCnWQClYMn55XbdwpBeWOcfjhNIMq6MZWfnelK PHmeCM14xdNlsBuEEJhZOcXcpydinU60YsefAOb2psRHuTsNgoacoq5ZC/36ZZA2 mxCCClymNlgkngSSq/ER/yHKkgM5EONg6ORgeYBca2JimQZzAZyfhVxf/+EwUBGM ccbQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=gIetJ7J38I75mDuj3KjdocgNEgQePJ2HS7QSYLcY3 TM=; b=tBomrfKfn8QaKtVGFFjcoCjHbnSQebaeknhS5u1lWjtI/CZ51WSzeLtz4 cxrUnPtYG7lpwtnIQUinVu31qFtKwtdZ6pf7p7jTMT+pGdnS7HxhiVYWbhuMnD41 mk3ZF+G0fs8QqmQh2DDhmdzd/jmQwEn8o2NMOspKgRMYXsMNaDXk8a3W8/y4WxEs mSDPQCzZiR1yzYmf6uCyWbcwPJVBbnRFUOJ37RPTn1D5VxgzpSBAl9HsOjXTznOi JOxLaezW4+nl9XW+q9KAWw6UvvtjMmo/ez3X/cH0qPuRLo58qZ8n5WtwFLOrm3Dk /GXmCyO30kAQg54SM9ymRwH6wMEqQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddviedgiedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhivghtfhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghr ufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhoph ihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7C9D3E00D3; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:37:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <8339a1f2-3215-446b-bd50-82962943e05e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <158384439069.15427.16653271470255787018@ietfa.amsl.com> <518946b5-c848-43ec-9ef1-99e9c925a20e@www.fastmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:37:23 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Mirja Kuehlewind" Cc: "The IESG" , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objectio?= =?utf-8?q?n_on_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 03:37:49 -0000 Hi Mirja, This got long, so I trimmed a few things out where you had some useful s= uggestions that seemed obvious enough. I have updated the same PR from = before at https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/45/files On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 05:27, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote: > There is a risk if chairs allow repos for some draft but not other,=20= > that those drafts are seen as more important. So I think some more=20 > discussion is needed in this document that if a wg decide to support=20= > individual drafts in their GitHub organisation, they are expected to=20= > give that opportunity to everybody asking. >=20 > However, I still see some higher risk here for confusing for people wh= o=20 > are less familiar with the IETF and the respective naming convention.=20= > In the datatracker the document for each wg are clearly separated into= =20 > a section for wg doc and other related docs. That is less obvious on=20= > GitHub, especially for people who only find things over GitHub and are= =20 > not aware of e.g. the datatracker or other IETF processes. >=20 > I=E2=80=99m not saying we should forbid this. Chairs are free in how t= hey think=20 > they can manage their groups best. But I also think we should not=20 > recommend it. Also we should probably give more guidelines how to make= =20 > it more clear that documents have different status in GitHub besides=20= > the draft name. E.g. there is the repo description that could include = a=20 > =E2=80=9Cwarning=E2=80=9D. Or we could recommend to have all wg doc re= pos as pinned=20 > repos but other not=E2=80=A6 I realize that this happens, but it is just one of many ways in which ch= airs might abuse their authority (intentionally or not). But I just don'= t see that happening here. Chairs who have this policy are open about i= t and extend this opportunity to any who request it. So I'm against making a firm recommendation. I like the potential for t= here to be no special status implied by inclusion in an organization, an= y more than having a draft listed on https://tools.ietf.org/wg/$WG/ or h= ttps://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/$WG/documents/ implies any special status= . > >=20 > >> 3) Sec 4.2: > >> " Editors SHOULD make pull requests for all substantial changes r= ather > >> than committing directly to the "master" branch of the repository= ." > >> I think this does not align well with how we work today (without Gi= tHub). E.g. > >> if a group decides to use GitHub to better track changes and maybe = easily > >> integrate editorial comments, but decide to have all discussion on = the mailing > >> list (and not use github issues), I think it would be fully okay fo= r the > >> editors just commit directly based on the consensus on the mailing = list. So I > >> think the important part is that substantial comments should only b= e committed > >> with wg consensus and therefore it is a good practice to have pull = requests > >> first to declare consensus based on the concrete proposed edits. Ho= wever, if a > >> different way to declare consensus is used that's fine as well. In = short, I > >> think the SHOULD is to string here for the general case. > >=20 > > I think that it greatly improves transparency, and I want to add tha= t WG policies could insist upon this practice, but we don't need normati= ve force in the two statements in this paragraph. >=20 > Yes, it should not be normative but I=E2=80=99m also not sure if that = practice=20 > is the right thing for every document. Yes it greatly can improve=20 > transparency and I agree that is is a good practice but for some e.g.=20= > small documents it might be more overhead/=E2=80=9Cprocess burden=E2=80= =9D than really=20 > needed. So I think it would be good to reword slightly and/or add som= e=20 > more emphasis that there might be cases where it might not be needed. I'm fairly sure that we have consensus in the WG to keep a recommendatio= n for this practice. It is now a recommendation without normative force= , are you suggesting that no such recommendation be made? Because I don= 't think that is reflective of the practices that have emerged, nor is i= t a good idea. > >> 4) Sec 5.3 (mostly editorial): [...] > >> This text seems to apply more general to all content in section 5 a= nd should > >> maybe be moved out of section 5.3. Similarly I'm not sure if sectio= n 5..3.1 and > >> 5.3.2 should actually be subsection of 5.3. The question of which i= ssue to > >> track seem rather orthogonal to the question who resolves the issue= (I agree > >> that this discussion does not make sense when no issue are tracked = like in sec > >> 5.1 but it could make sense for the mode in section 5.2) > >=20 > > The organization here is tricky, but I do agree that this text is ge= neric. I've moved the piece you quoted up to the intro to Section 5. >=20 > Thanks! What=E2=80=99s about 5.3.1 and 5.3.1. I would recommend to cre= ate a new=20 > subsection there and not have these subsubsection within 5.3. Maybe I'm not following you now. My view is that the 4 paragraphs under= 5.3 directly belong there without creating additional subsections. > Thanks! I would also propose to slightly rephrase it to make it more=20= > GitHub specific=20 > "The risk is that changes that potentially contain design changes migh= t=20 > get merged into the working version of the document before consensus o= f=20 > the Working Group is confirmed. However, transparency of these changes= =20 > is expected to still be higher compared to when documents are=20 > maintained by the editors without any detailed change log.=E2=80=9D I've reworded this, but I think that the second sentence you propose is = duplicative of the paragraph that follows. Here's what I have now: > [...] The risk is from integrating changes including substantive decis= ions that don't reflect the consensus of the Working Group or that the need for consensus on an issu= e is not identified. > > Changes made by editors under this process do not lack options for ide= ntifying and correcting problems. GitHub and git provide tools for ensu= ring that changes are tracked and can be audited. > >> 8) Sec 5.3.2: > >> " As documents mature further, explicit confirmation of technical= > >> decisions with the Working Group mailing list becomes more import= ant." > >> Not sure I agree here. I know what you mean but explicit confirmati= on on the > >> mailing list is always important. Maybe there is a way to rephrase = that (or > >> just remove that sentence...?) > >=20 > > This is really only emphasis, but I would prefer to keep it. >=20 > I=E2=80=99m concern that this sentence implies that technical design c= hanges do=20 > not need to be confirmed in the early phase, which I think it just=20 > wrong. I think this is more than emphasis. I will have to disagree here. The previous section is quite deliberate = about the need for obtaining review and consensus on these decisions. T= he point is that there are fewer opportunities left to find and discuss = issues on a mature specification. > I believe you already revised this text based on other comments, right= ?=20 > (Lost track a bit). If so, maybe you can just point me add the next=20= > text=E2=80=A6? You aren't the only one, it was in response to Alvaro: > Chairs can declare Working Group consensus about the resolution of iss= ues in the abstract, allowing editors discretion on how to capture the d= ecisions in documents. -- https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/47/files#diff-f0832ea= 1138ac7354c220723b246954bR633-R636 > > The intent here is to reiterate 2418 regarding session documents and= to encourage routine publication of snapshots. >=20 > Actually it might be better to not use normative language here and=20 > rather point to 2418. However, right now the text does not seems to=20= > encourage routine publication of snapshots but rather it seems to=20 > encourage to =E2=80=9Conly=E2=80=9D publish if there is a meeting. That happened as a result of a review (and now I'm losing track too): ht= tps://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/48/files From nobody Thu Mar 12 20:45:10 2020 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 0E0CF3A0F47; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:44:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 pEvq9xuOZbuu; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-il1-x141.google.com (mail-il1-x141.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::141]) (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 0F7C93A0F46; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x141.google.com with SMTP id x2so7585278ila.9; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:44:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=puEyqP3XgNw9A6LXU3Az2Fob98pjZFmsstIs5jaN30o=; b=sbt1vqTiLX+BVXTTjYL2boctu2hu1WoylWUN/u+j/Lh8gG3I4/pp4m/oZAkaDUfLVR ogoGj4DwesFeDzABo1yYh3m4LI2bR3rU1kI/46KYqWzGgwmf8perY6yxmKFgD4F+5WpT 6otNRtYWvNeLisJQUZGcPy92DhLS/Gr9Dhem3qfG1o81N3XcZ6FT7npAQVw6gc/COxKC Z1Yt72y8WLyaUjTyFuIjChXqO4dHLS4HJNEleErRwahSgoNs21q7sZRcZCus3eMevNVC YDk9ZVai628kYhPoUlPfKrC34afMcUOry+VaIVdzuniRgQxZ6adJ9+o2b4wzf0R+I1OE z1tQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=puEyqP3XgNw9A6LXU3Az2Fob98pjZFmsstIs5jaN30o=; b=hEmpC+zG7Ge5EKM86OXAL3jocCvo9RHGypraLBsw+yqoLlk+6Z+DtnIqV1LJMRugCW Gopbj5aFqt4qoPq1ZdEUkvdV5xZ2bWsDUszRY1Qk6CGdmiPswd5u+LLa8iV5+pn+csdY afpceov9TvbVVE6Cm9nNcRSNnIWJ1rTfUErmREap2g3DjC5SEQ2W2TyBm5kuekKzngct zxBjuHEKxKsKVe/MMmHSTu5TE9Qx7k28GP3/+2mCwlsCOSY3NG+WEXsWYXXB/AftHx9j y4kdJ1m+DsPBMh7OhomFfX8/FJ1sr0QbOjltHnLunZaF0wR8Ro7/j/51h7Ap1rr0hpB/ L9bA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0J7PLUj0yvuTYFjQFBQ9B9lLyYxfFjkCD3/sUNAJJGANcCAfYP ztW1aj4WPpmalp4EmvKuNAWlS+u2FC0b4DPiYIEedjNAknI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vs3WgXf0sBx4MKmDcmIqKFD5c2K19aXU95ouE2OtSB9lUPZDkKaJV/16Qoal6+/k6dFw/4WfYKaiI/jal4/1TQ= X-Received: by 2002:a92:8c42:: with SMTP id o63mr10898761ild.189.1584071087213; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:44:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158384439069.15427.16653271470255787018@ietfa.amsl.com> <518946b5-c848-43ec-9ef1-99e9c925a20e@www.fastmail.com> <8339a1f2-3215-446b-bd50-82962943e05e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8339a1f2-3215-446b-bd50-82962943e05e@www.fastmail.com> From: Rob Sayre Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:44:33 +1000 Message-ID: To: Martin Thomson Cc: Mirja Kuehlewind , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000073d56605a0b44a1d" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objectio?= =?utf-8?q?n_on_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 03:44:50 -0000 --00000000000073d56605a0b44a1d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 1:37 PM Martin Thomson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 05:27, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote: > > > > Actually it might be better to not use normative language here and > > rather point to 2418. However, right now the text does not seems to > > encourage routine publication of snapshots but rather it seems to > > encourage to =E2=80=9Conly=E2=80=9D publish if there is a meeting. > > That happened as a result of a review (and now I'm losing track too): > https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/48/files This is all getting a bit long, to be honest. It is very odd for the IESG to focus on this draft so intently. Dare I say "bikeshed"? thanks, Rob --00000000000073d56605a0b44a1d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 1:37 PM Martin Th= omson <mt@lowentropy.net> wr= ote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 05:27, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote:
>
> Actually it might be better to not use normative language here and > rather point to 2418. However, right now the text does not seems to > encourage routine publication of snapshots but rather it seems to
> encourage to =E2=80=9Conly=E2=80=9D publish if there is a meeting.

That happened as a result of a review (and now I'm losing track too): <= a href=3D"https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/48/files" rel=3D"= noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pu= ll/48/files

This is all getting a bit l= ong, to be honest. It is very odd for the IESG to focus on this draft so in= tently. Dare I say "bikeshed"?

thanks,
Rob

--00000000000073d56605a0b44a1d-- From nobody Thu Mar 12 20:50:38 2020 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 3D86F3A0F67; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:50:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=ti1DA5f4; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=KxeO4e6C 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 WQUFVKOP-tQg; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:50:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD4ED3A0F66; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:50:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF57D220F4; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:50:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:50:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=3ILqUJ+Rh1ooSuE1nD82US5M8olU sidG2uB4w+zYGik=; b=ti1DA5f4hHvvdams0uCvgGi+3AE/xrldgLKXaM2Zs8qP freoYrF/rxVJiZCMG/iMtEw2T9zlxUzV3DeUFa46QYPgO/LdjVKxwk17qTNHEOxL ZvXP30Wd4GtRRsJGD0u/bJma3qh2rBwsS3hcbyD+AojXfim+5zAxirKK1nEPdDC3 +5CHzsh81c2sHdG8ICZ6BHP9hrE5cJ8+onIZ9cVV6/A1IHdgTe6boA1MhjwpGIGs vPSZFnnNE7uoZe4EFtmqfBFrVGBb+HIfFPHX+EbrZUr+Ed29whFYfHYv/VLKMg6T 9uycxFZeU34AyagtEtpfy6NmReXfjr8zlIuBr7EwPA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=3ILqUJ +Rh1ooSuE1nD82US5M8olUsidG2uB4w+zYGik=; b=KxeO4e6CHcG2ikVOVIq4GT S1jAQ6HW+8uTyIUtMGCfq7LE1g4Lf+astChW+hSf9kUuXmlqJlXyoqru1yxIXkEB QN2SE0WkQEhwpfYEO/yqQ+tdJH03HoaRSpDZleYxXGlsyllLJ//Wrc01bUr+irq7 s7O5z0lUHNRnO1vOUUz/mcTM+Gufy/4K5sX0tQn7a3DqCpdv0I/Xsa8TsB7bmMkG CHBNF3QY8vCpLKiX1JlwuoBWht69DcXKST3RJX7Nc0gNV6bR2jPiZXu78+q9t6Rr LHRVPlB52+wQpakbKHg3jlBTN3WrP21rVz6pjbnDHGC1xSh/EBxWl9YtuY01nurQ == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddviedgieduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuve hluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7D90BE00A2; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:50:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <158384439069.15427.16653271470255787018@ietfa.amsl.com> <518946b5-c848-43ec-9ef1-99e9c925a20e@www.fastmail.com> <8339a1f2-3215-446b-bd50-82962943e05e@www.fastmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:50:13 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Rob Sayre" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "The IESG" , git-chairs@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objectio?= =?utf-8?q?n_on_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 03:50:37 -0000 On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 14:44, Rob Sayre wrote: > This is all getting a bit long, to be honest. It is very odd for the > IESG to focus on this draft so intently. Dare I say "bikeshed"? I take the opposing view. I greatly appreciate that the IESG care enough to make this document better. But maybe this suggests that there is room for improvement in the process. Maybe like using something like GitHub for all the minor stuff to reduce the number of stray email bits caught by innocent bystanders. But the need for transparency at this stage of the process is greater than previously, so it's not that simple. From nobody Thu Mar 12 20:58:49 2020 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 B2EFE3A0F8B; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:58:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 vNJBi8jysmxI; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-il1-x141.google.com (mail-il1-x141.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::141]) (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 3279A3A0F89; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x141.google.com with SMTP id k29so7664591ilg.0; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:58:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Lk/1SObWmAfmelI25SJMfScVsQAHwOr1CryhxN6zFUc=; b=DAYXOCg0ieEiO/RE5Cjn0H86SFrS7EoHFHh+SuqXrKFa6363a2OjcRa8Ogdh6z7x8h 9nq6Q4nfooOe78Z/HRDb1ZaMAjBjYQuOZoDf0jGQg24gcl+A7TicY6fYoq1a6tcIlAd5 ap9iS0Si+RYQrMNtCrivAK4ieetMLH+istHjVBgS1B1MTwraoR8qPh8yJI1R5q84+qD6 7Rg8gfRULbrnb81VHTrKPwJ4VOUQCdmMmhCNeR1E8pAPdW9PrC7/qddgEgXhy/LcRJow 8wzTA12ACpkt0N6bpdHWuqylHPNAXi7J0zLBsMp4l4eTmb5w4ChkuedMEfDngPnwTDyo 9upw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Lk/1SObWmAfmelI25SJMfScVsQAHwOr1CryhxN6zFUc=; b=kyocTzwLfLoSE2wgpIteo49BSolem8DSpvCywrxHTXu4NdzLwsWW8ueV+MiDaqN/Kk X32gvixrlRxpH4pwNP8olSmfh1sAubuJvFLT5DPaxPHsj/MExJ+iTe1QNlyi/ItnIduq dj2HZN4uz+ZCcZuYvWbimLqOa26yHnGrhjyCghxWNmQS5ppb17GThg/hrkbhcNN9fZ6W uZWwPaHKqihNepqF51wFWIqwQ4ZJNWThEOfjJflxtS3j9+9cptMd7p6LD/Fkzpto6V6g t1tTT6mjpOSm59LX2Lydh5pBipuf/S7GNHlWHi44dzwNOy+nE/nvj7AoGxtOWXY6tSCk nw/g== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3cQ6YpH+rTbqYqL/cAKA9RGmjxMvQUfrZlb1tswvm9DpSgTxa4 J3+GrZx3tz0Hd5BZAtRvbdV7uiIlo429Onb4Qgo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtuNsLbfYRswLEWL38DQvaC8GgkFq3NlGYUi8yirL7/tcvTBOrw4l0iCTRWsUpmL5vk05LAsLvPTEhyGEiPQyc= X-Received: by 2002:a92:8c42:: with SMTP id o63mr10933520ild.189.1584071925187; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:58:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158384439069.15427.16653271470255787018@ietfa.amsl.com> <518946b5-c848-43ec-9ef1-99e9c925a20e@www.fastmail.com> <8339a1f2-3215-446b-bd50-82962943e05e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Rob Sayre Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:58:32 +1000 Message-ID: To: Martin Thomson Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, The IESG , git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000664ac105a0b47cbb" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objectio?= =?utf-8?q?n_on_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 03:58:48 -0000 --000000000000664ac105a0b47cbb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 1:50 PM Martin Thomson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 14:44, Rob Sayre wrote: > > This is all getting a bit long, to be honest. It is very odd for the > > IESG to focus on this draft so intently. Dare I say "bikeshed"? > > I take the opposing view. I greatly appreciate that the IESG care enough > to make this document better. > Sure, but this level of scrutiny is not appropriate for a document that contains easily-reversible decisions. It's not the same as shipping a protocol that will become part of the internet. But maybe this suggests that there is room for improvement in the process. > Maybe like using something like GitHub for all the minor stuff to reduce > the number of stray email bits caught by innocent bystanders. But the need > for transparency at this stage of the process is greater than previously, > so it's not that simple. > I think the patience shown here is good, but don't think many of these discussions are material. In particular, it's possible to run a pre-github workflow in concert with the workflows in this draft. thanks, Rob --000000000000664ac105a0b47cbb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 1:50 PM Martin Th= omson <mt@lowentropy.net> wr= ote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 14:44, Rob Sayre wrote:
> This is all getting a bit long, to be honest. It is very odd for the <= br> > IESG to focus on this draft so intently. Dare I say "bikeshed&quo= t;?

I take the opposing view.=C2=A0 I greatly appreciate that the IESG care eno= ugh to make this document better.

Sure,= but this level of scrutiny is not appropriate for a document that contains= easily-reversible decisions. It's not the same as shipping a protocol = that will become part of the internet.
=C2=A0

But maybe this suggests that there is room for improvement in the process.= =C2=A0 Maybe like using something like GitHub for all the minor stuff to re= duce the number of stray email bits caught by innocent bystanders.=C2=A0 Bu= t the need for transparency at this stage of the process is greater than pr= eviously, so it's not that simple.

= I think the patience shown here is good, but don't think many of these = discussions are material. In particular, it's possible to run a pre-git= hub workflow in concert with the workflows in this draft.

thanks,
Rob

--000000000000664ac105a0b47cbb-- From nobody Thu Mar 12 21:20:35 2020 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 A5A583A0FDE; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:20:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.363 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.363 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.463, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 Rp8EVpyfAtW8; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:20:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (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 32FC03A0FDC; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:20:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kduck.mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 02D4KESL017943 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:20:16 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 21:20:13 -0700 From: Benjamin Kaduk To: Martin Thomson Cc: The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Message-ID: <20200313042013.GS98042@kduck.mit.edu> References: <158399640667.19763.6579678147144027590@ietfa.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 04:20:24 -0000 Hi Martin, On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 01:55:55PM +1100, Martin Thomson wrote: > Hi Ben, > > Thanks for the close reading and constructive feedback. My pleasure! > I've opened a PR based on your comments: https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/52 > > I have snipped out those comments that appear to be editorial in nature to concentrate on the substantive matters. > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 18:00, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote: > > In the vein of other comments, are we providing "best practices" > > (Abstract) or "guidelines" (Introduction")? > > In the abstract (not the Abstract), this was always written with the intent of being a set of guidelines. Following those guidelines would be a best practice (though perhaps not a Best Practice that is also Current). > > What I'm saying is that I realize that the distinction between these is important and I think that the determination about whether this is a BCP or Informational (we're headed toward the latter, I believe) shapes that. I will propose a change to the abstract and intended status to that effect. > > https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/51 (I think I need to catch up on the other threads before I have anything useful to add here. Thanks for staying on top of it.) > > Section 2.1 > > > > Organizations are a way of forming groups of contributors on GitHub. > > Each Working Group SHOULD create a new organization for the Working > > Group. A Working Group organization SHOULD be named consistently so > > that it can be found. For instance, the name could be ietf- > > wg-, as recommended in [GH-CONFIG]. > > > > I'm not sure I understand why the recommended value for consistency is > > given in the Informational document as opposed to the BCP. > > I think that is because that's a tactical concern and not one that bears on the general guidance. I am OK with the current location of that text. I'm happy to defer to your judgment. > (BTW, this threw me because I couldn't find this text where I was looking.) It does come off a bit obtuse, yes; sorry about that. (I could have said "why do we mention the string ietf-wg- here when we defer to some other document to actually recommend that string" instead.) > > A single organization SHOULD NOT be used for all IETF activity, or > > all activity within an area. Large organizations create too much > > overhead for general management tasks, particularly when there is a > > need to maintain membership. > > > > Is this a membership list or membership that's synchronized with > > something else, or ...? > > I've just cut that clause. It was just odd. The best I could come up with was that it indicated the need for an ongoing curation activity as opposed to an initial static configuration. > > > We seem to have introduced the github concept of "team" in passing here; > > a more prominent note might be helpful. > > I did that, but in checking on this, I found that this has changed quite a bit since this text was originally written. So for the sake of transparency (and I'm hoping that it doesn't change too much more in the future), this is what I have now: > > > Within an organization, members can be grouped into teams that are collectively given privileges with respect to repositories. A team with "Admin" access to repositories SHOULD be created for the Working Group Chairs and any Working Group Secretary. > > Note that the note about not being able to push no longer applies (this was a feature of the previous, now non-existent system, I think). I am not entirely sure; I think part of why github added Admin as distinct from Owner was to avoid granting implicit write. > > that new contributors need. The README SHOULD contain a link to the > > CONTRIBUTING file. > > > > Should/can the README contain anything else? > > Not formally, no. Though it routinely might include other things, like explain what the document is for, or link to the document. Okay. If we wanted to say "the README is just a pointer to CONTRIBUTING" we could do that, but it sounds like we don't. > > Section 3 > > > > Chairs MUST involve Area Directors in any decision to use GitHub for > > anything more than managing drafts. > > > > I think I saw another comment about this bit (but probably not all the > > replies); it seems like the intent is more along the lines of "issue > > tracker" type things than "slides for WG sessions", so clarification is > > in order. > > Yes, that text was updated in response to Barry. The consultation recommendation is now limited to when it comes to moving issue discussion to GitHub. See https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/commit/e74ba457de2f0843a42c1214bec0033f559f187a That helps a lot. I am not sure whether it says something one way or the other about "any decision to use GitHub" being a one-time thing vs. re-consulting for incremental changes in usage. > > Section 3.1 > > > > Working Group policies need to be set with the goal of improving > > transparency, participation, and ultimately the quality of the > > consensus behind documents. At times, it might be appropriate to > > > > Is there an example of how the policies might affect quality of > > consensus. (Also, does "quality of the documents" or even "quality of > > the protocol being documented" not matter?) > > I don't know whether you think that this needs text, but my view is that what we've seen in some of these efforts is greater alignment on the specific phrasing of text. That doesn't necessarily mean that text is good (or right). That is not something that is receptive to an objective analysis. But the fact that you can litigate every apostrophe has improved the quantity of consensus, and the quality of it too. > > OK, that was perhaps a little cynical. I think that this can improve the quality of the underlying product as well, but it is not clear that the process actually cares about that. > > Dammit, that was cynical too. I think you are right, quality of documents is probably enough (as this is not limited to protocol specifications, I will avoid mentioning those specifically, but leave it as implicit). [I appreciate following your inner monologue, and like where the text ended up.] > > Section 3.4 > > > > In addition to the canonical XML format [RFC7991], document editors > > > > [I'll channel Julian Reschke and note that RFC 7991 does not describe > > the exact XML vocabulary used for the canonical RFC output...] > > Hm. Julian is of course correct, but it's a technical kind of correctness that tends not to leave room for making statements that depend on the intent of the document, which this is. Depending on what you bind "canonical" to this sentence is more or less correct. But I agree that we should not change the text... > > Section 5.2 > > > > In addition to managing documents, the Working Group might choose to > > use GitHub for tracking outstanding issues. In this mode of > > interaction, all substantive technical discussions are tracked as > > issues in the issue tracker. However, discussion of any substantial > > > > Is it the discussions themselves that are tracked, or the existence of > > the topic being discussed? > > It's the existence of the issue. I've tweaked that language (and some of the latter text) to better align with that view. > > > Section 5.3.1 > > > > review. Finally, process checkpoints like Working Group Last Call > > (WGLC; Section 7.4 of [RFC2418]) provides additional safeguards > > against abuse. > > > > This section is "Early Design Phases"; would a document move directly > > from "early design phase" to WGLC without some other intermediate step > > which would allow for detection of such abuse? (In light of the > > following paragraph perhaps the best approach is to change the name used > > to describe this phase.) > > In response to Mirja, most of the following text was moved; see https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/45 . I haven't read her followup yet, but more might come. However, as this is in response to a particular issue that only really arises from the interaction style under discussion, I don't see an easy way to resolve this without more restructuring and I'm disinclined to do that now as that could be too disruptive (I don't want this to be the reason, but there are also 10 PRs open with known conflicts to resolve). I doubt that my remark here had any key insight and am happy to let the other PRs settle and take a look at that result. > > Section 5.4 > > > > Working Groups or editors might use additional labels as they choose. > > Any label that is used as part of a process requires that the process > > be documented and announced by Working Group chairs. Editors SHOULD > > be permitted to use labels to manage issues without any formal > > process significance being attached to those issues. > > > > Is there some conflict between "WG chairs must document and announce > > process" and "editors are permitted to use labels without any formal > > process significance"? I'm not really sure I understand what this is > > trying to say. > > No conflict. I was hoping that is was clear that semantics might be assigned to a set labels (editorial/design for instance), but that other labels should remain usable for other purposes. Oh, it's the *labels* that lack formal process significance, not the use of them. Sure, that makes sense. > > Section 6 > > > > This creates a stable snapshot and makes the content of the in- > > progress document available to a wider audience. Documents submitted > > > > Is "wider audience" code for "the traditional IETF mode of work"? Stuff > > on github seems ... pretty available, as does the I-D archive; it's hard > > to have much confidence in a claim that one has a "wider audience" than > > the other. > > Yes. It is recognizing that there are some people who prefer to consume things in a particular format and that those people might not be considered part of the audience who consume the GitHub versions. I always use the editor's copy of drafts on GitHub where possible, but I have heard that others, particularly those who track things less closely, might prefer not to have to deal with a moving target. > > In terms of the claim, I think that it's accurate, as long as the audience for an I-D is not a strict subset of the audience for the content provided on GitHub, then A∪B > A. > > > If permitted, GitHub will be used for technical discussion and > > decisions, especially during early stages of development of a > > document. Any decisions are ultimately confirmed through review, and > > ultimately, through Working Group Last Call (see Section 7.4 of > > [RFC2418]). > > > > I'm not sure I understand what is meant by "review". > > added "...within the WG". > > > I agree with Roman that it's surprising to mention that tools for > > backing up "other information" exist but not make any recommendation for > > their usage. > > Added a stronger recommendation to backup. That is happening anyway. > > > We could perhaps mention the potential consequences due to > > authentication breach at github (minimal, due to distributed backups and > > the I-D archive). > > I will mention that. Thanks. Thanks! -Ben From nobody Fri Mar 13 05:04:00 2020 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 A59143A16A2; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:03:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=Z/JA3qK8; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=Z3NcFxxP 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 6n5C-wfuDobF; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:03:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2545A3A16B2; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:03:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=15798; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584101028; x=1585310628; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=wR9J0dThhQWS439dnKRY0ctWPfSDTJ5wg90BJ2tbiyA=; b=Z/JA3qK8kkcD9Edmrfa244pnw5brJ2fu02YkVK/wiyEPhAqgZ2CRBYBw u2j+MwuI73aRyDzKaY+jkOOiTrPvoR2VAmiSzYTfDgZa2O3QRA0UOYwyT /ZYJB0cUBM/n17GpjiheYOH0lWJa/r0Y3QxOtFgTlCG+oOJn79NWELKjX Y=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3Axrl3cRSuXMKArr4o3bIOILAoFNpsv++ubAcI9p?= =?us-ascii?q?oqja5Pea2//pPkeVbS/uhpkESXBdfA8/wRje3QvuigQmEG7Zub+FE6OJ1XH1?= =?us-ascii?q?5g640NmhA4RsuMCEn1NvnvOjYlHcBeU1lN9HCgOk8TE8H7NBXf?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CyAAB3dmte/40NJK1mGgEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQMBAQEBEQEBAQICAQEBAYF7gVQkBScFbFggBAsqCoQLg0UDim6CX4EBlxe?= =?us-ascii?q?BQoEQA1QJAQEBDAEBJwYCBAEBhEMCF4IFJDgTAgMBAQsBAQUBAQECAQUEbYV?= =?us-ascii?q?WDIVjAQEBAQIBEhERDAEBMgUBCwQCAQgOAwQBAQECAhEBARMCAgIwFQgIAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?EAQ0FCAwBDYMFgkoDDiABAwugUQKBOYhidYEygn8BAQWBLwETQYMmGIIMCYE?= =?us-ascii?q?OKowuGoFBP4ERR4FPSTU+gmQBAQIBAYEaAREBEgEJGj0JAoJHMoIsjVRRAoJ?= =?us-ascii?q?IhhqJco9CCoI8h1aFTYQcGYU0gkoxUIcmhE+MAY8CgU6HM5JaAgQCBAUCDgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BBYFpIis8XQwIcBWDJwlHGA2OHQwXgQQBDII/hAiBDIVBdA0CgRqKZA8XgQs?= =?us-ascii?q?BgQ8BAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,548,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="455249437" Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 13 Mar 2020 12:03:33 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (xch-rcd-005.cisco.com [173.37.102.15]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02DC3Xae032684 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:03:33 GMT Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (173.37.102.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 07:03:32 -0500 Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 07:03:32 -0500 Received: from NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 08:03:32 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=fb+WKYE3OFnLI7EC3Vnt/onsgwZB1seYr+SHCaf40v7nkC7Hyb8cnzz/8ogftdjmRYACwlt2Gz/Ll+Sjr5jjbg9NCDmNnK926WzyeXfEDtPs1IWY4ncw7xAYW9XUYIu8IsxAO44o93ZuGU8dmcnJFDf7IheIO5k7EjmEv7B72nkq1r4+LoRzQCAN7T/u+Dg4vBQ725AefbQmPpMot2lj8KolPeAxMIgWxsB2/SVntTCqvESkKkiMJXFhS6AGq2SrcJckOtr9pTxxVfom1qzRxHpioQWtAJHnqJNucmbjBXgfLl9BG4Ey//YG8ycVJ66EQt0YN3T+mbRpEqIZLz3WNA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=wR9J0dThhQWS439dnKRY0ctWPfSDTJ5wg90BJ2tbiyA=; b=nFoR5mbi9fGWQY+yjWYKVLAFCEugcf4rx3W4Tjv1r7WMWHFDWeqpkmJ+/7YNxFLwspCPgNQFZgFwng4dJ30saBdGHbZixgkKpFyKCyOES11YmFoU44G/SizXmU7IcZ6UYDACcGeA1Izay66iPJrGDqDScJVvCxep1Fwh0sjHUuuhBuqSSjijYgw4n3Rp0NTkwXHz0Dcwx0SZPDj3YP9Hk3eoQUejBKGCWiwkh/EPXNfjDn7JXcFtc92Fy394SckPJ8qYmlICitBvYHj1o2uCbyMURKJpXuCeI9l2ehzkK/+ZE6vGoovddcLCj8xk7/kHAVjGd9HATNDfoFNwTqaTTA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=wR9J0dThhQWS439dnKRY0ctWPfSDTJ5wg90BJ2tbiyA=; b=Z3NcFxxPLDJO2WTTl3wlHJKIuV8NwXtee+mltljXLr8+nvIQROSSUufq23jeU5XC1a6vj0CyaAuq/ZGnfbiWOeSK5K3+HaC0pZ6rA7jRtSoWhH8iHi8ocFEWCn00YuWLKD+KYCvCLhhR32Z28jY4YozttrC5VmtLPb99EQo1GTU= Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:190::17) by MN2PR11MB3917.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:135::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.18; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:03:31 +0000 Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2814.018; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:03:31 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: Martin Thomson , The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , Christopher Wood Thread-Topic: RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 Thread-Index: AdX20DXn6nk7ia9BTXi3bSvYC2yFiwAnJ+6AAAcSpnA= Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:03:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: <03a88995-a64b-4214-a408-1e826f3ecc9a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <03a88995-a64b-4214-a408-1e826f3ecc9a@www.fastmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [82.15.79.32] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 6302a9dc-96e1-4b0f-eff7-08d7c7468c38 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3917: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8273; x-forefront-prvs: 034119E4F6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(39860400002)(346002)(376002)(136003)(396003)(366004)(199004)(7696005)(8676002)(4326008)(2906002)(8936002)(81156014)(81166006)(86362001)(53546011)(64756008)(6506007)(66556008)(66446008)(66476007)(52536014)(66574012)(30864003)(66946007)(9686003)(55016002)(5660300002)(76116006)(110136005)(54906003)(71200400001)(316002)(186003)(26005)(33656002)(966005)(478600001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB3917; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 78thYSYnJV6MO9zRxyGhBnjw7vO+HQoLOshdlio4rK3H6URmAt1uttL5H2BuHouMvG69gnUMEFeY9n9uCSWRJvm0eVLjde+Hnu5gK52MsLuwkVyOYiPuhlmKL0xDepLi7AfdR/lzqrgtmwa1PGj95A== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 6302a9dc-96e1-4b0f-eff7-08d7c7468c38 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Mar 2020 12:03:30.7186 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 4LOLM2LU4unuyqaeR4tItzeT9oPP88zopP+upCpbEwZ+sy79FikVrPPre6l9WGyFCCnD8XCeARIc0moi68cnOw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3917 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.15, xch-rcd-005.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-8.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 12:03:51 -0000 SGkgTWFydGluLA0KDQpBcG9sb2dpZXMgZm9yIHRoZSBkZWxheWVkIHJlc3BvbnNlLiAgRnVydGhl ciBjb21tZW50cyBpbmxpbmUgLi4uDQoNCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4g RnJvbTogTWFydGluIFRob21zb24gPG10QGxvd2VudHJvcHkubmV0Pg0KPiBTZW50OiAxMSBNYXJj aCAyMDIwIDA2OjE4DQo+IFRvOiBSb2IgV2lsdG9uIChyd2lsdG9uKSA8cndpbHRvbkBjaXNjby5j b20+OyBUaGUgSUVTRyA8aWVzZ0BpZXRmLm9yZz47DQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtZ2l0LXVzaW5nLWdp dGh1YkBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBDYzogaWV0Zi1hbmQtZ2l0aHViQGlldGYub3JnOyBnaXQtY2hhaXJz QGlldGYub3JnOyBDaHJpc3RvcGhlciBXb29kDQo+IDxjYXdAaGVhcGluZ2JpdHMubmV0Pg0KPiBT dWJqZWN0OiBSZTogUm9iV2lsdG9uIHJldmlldyBvZiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWdpdC11c2luZy1naXRo dWItMDUNCj4gDQo+IEhpIFJvYiwNCj4gDQo+IFRoYW5rcyBmb3IgcmV2aWV3aW5nIHRoaXMgYW5k IHlvdXIgdGhvdWdodHMgaGVyZS4NCj4gDQo+IEkndmUgYnVpbHQgeW91IGEgUFIgaGVyZTogaHR0 cHM6Ly9naXRodWIuY29tL2lldGYtZ2l0d2cvdXNpbmctDQo+IGdpdGh1Yi9wdWxsLzQ0DQo+IFNv bWUgb2YgeW91ciBjb21tZW50cyBhcmUgYWxyZWFkeSBhZGRyZXNzZWQgYnkgb3RoZXIgUFJzIHRo b3VnaDoNCj4gaHR0cHM6Ly9naXRodWIuY29tL2lldGYtZ2l0d2cvdXNpbmctZ2l0aHViL3B1bGxz DQo+IA0KPiBPbiBXZWQsIE1hciAxMSwgMjAyMCwgYXQgMDM6MjMsIFJvYiBXaWx0b24gKHJ3aWx0 b24pIHdyb3RlOg0KPiA+IEkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCAoYSkgY2FuIGJlIG1pdGlnYXRlZCBieSBhZGRp bmcgZXh0cmEgb3JnYW5pemF0aW9uIG93bmVycywNCj4gPiBiZXlvbmQganVzdCB0aGUgcmVzcG9u c2libGUgQUQuIEUuZy4sIHRoZSBnaXRodWItY29uZmlnIHN1Z2dlc3RzIGFsc28NCj4gPiBhZGRp bmcgdGhlIFNlY3JldGFyaWF0LiBXZSBzaG91bGQgYmUgY29uc2lzdGVudCBoZXJlLCBhbmQgSSB0 aGluayB0aGF0DQo+ID4gd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGRlY2lkZSB3aGV0aGVyIGhhdmluZyBqdXN0IHRoZSBB RCBhbmQgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQgaXMNCj4gPiBzdWZmaWNpZW50LiBXb3VsZCBpdCBhbHNvIG1ha2Ug c2Vuc2UgdG8gbWFuZGF0ZSB0aGUgMkZBIG11c3QgYmUgdXNlZA0KPiA+IGJ5IGFsbCBtZW1iZXJz PyBJZiBzbywgdGhlbiB0aGlzIGNhbiBiZSBlbmZvcmNlZCBpbiB0aGUgb3JnYW5pemF0aW9uDQo+ ID4gc2V0dGluZ3MuDQo+IA0KPiBUaGUgZmlyc3QgcGFydCBvZiB0aGlzIHByb2JhYmx5IGFwcGxp ZXMgdG8gdGhlIC1jb25maWcgZHJhZnQgbW9zdGx5LiAgTXkNCj4gdW5kZXJzdGFuZGluZyBpcyB0 aGF0IGl0IGlzbid0IG1vcmUgZGVmaW5pdGl2ZSBpbiBvcmRlciB0byBhbGxvdyBjaGFpcnMNCj4g c29tZSBmbGV4aWJpbGl0eSBpbiBob3cgdGhleSBvcGVyYXRlLg0KW1JXXSANCg0KT2theSwgSSB3 YXMgc29ydCByZWFkaW5nIHRoZSBzcGxpdCBiZXR3ZWVuIHRoZSB0d28gZG9jdW1lbnRzIGFzIHNw ZWNpZmljYXRpb24gdnMgaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb24uDQoNCg0KICBJIHBlcnNvbmFsbHkgdGhpbmsg dGhhdCBoYXZpbmcgYQ0KPiBiYWNrdXAgaXMgc2Vuc2libGUuICBBdCB0aGUgc2FtZSB0aW1lLCBo YXZpbmcgYSBzaW5nbGUgYWNjb3VudCB3aXRoIGFjY2Vzcw0KPiB0byBtYW55IHJlcG9zaXRvcmll cyBpcyBhIGJpdCBzY2FyeS4NCltSV10gDQpIdW0geWVzLCBtYXliZSBoYXZpbmcgdGhlIFNlY3Jl dGFyaWF0IG9uIGFsbCBXR3MgaXMgbm90IGEgZ29vZCBjaG9pY2UuICBQZXJoYXBzIHdlIHNob3Vs ZCBzYXkgdGhhdCBhbGwgQURzIGZvciB0aGUgYXJlYSBzaG91bGQgYmUgb3duZXJzIHJhdGhlciB0 aGFuIGp1c3QgdGhlIHJlc3BvbnNpYmxlIEFELCBhbmQgdGhlcmUgbXVzdCBhbHdheXMgYmUgYSBt aW5pbXVtIG9mIDIgb3duZXJzPyAgU28sIGZvciB0aGUgZ2VuZXJhbCBhcmVhIHBlcmhhcHMgaXQg d291bGQgYmUgdGhlIEFEIGFuZCB0aGUgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQ/DQoNCk9idmlvdXNseSB0aGlzIHdv dWxkIG5lZWQgdG8gYmUgYWxpZ25lZCB3aXRoIHRoZSBjb25maWcgZHJhZnQuDQoNCj4gDQo+IFRo ZSAyRkEgdGhpbmcgaXMgZ29vZCBhZHZpY2UsIGJ1dCBJIHdvdWxkIGFnYWluIGxlYXZlIHRoYXQg dG8gaW5kaXZpZHVhbA0KPiBncm91cHMuICBCdXQgbm90IGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaXNuJ3QgZ29vZCBh ZHZpY2UsIG1vcmUgYmVjYXVzZSB0aGUgc3RhdGUgb2YNCj4gdGhlIGFydCBmb3IgbG9naW4gaXMg bGlrZWx5IHRvIGNoYW5nZS4gIFdlYkF1dGhuIGlzIGV2ZW4gYmV0dGVyIHRoYW4gMkZBLA0KPiBi dXQgdGhhdCBpcyB1c2VkIGV2ZW4gbGVzcyB0b2RheS4gIEluIDIgeWVhcnMgbWF5YmUgdGhhdCB3 b24ndCBiZSB0cnVlLg0KW1JXXQ0KUGVyaGFwcyB0aGUgc2VjdXJpdHkgc2VjdGlvbiBjb3VsZCBt ZW50aW9uIHNvbWUgb2YgdGhlIHJpc2tzIChlLmcuIGxvc2luZyBkYXRhLCBsb3NpbmcgY29udHJv bCwgaGF2aW5nIG5lZmFyaW91cyBjaGFuZ2VzIGluamVjdGVkIGludG8gYSBkcmFmdCksIGFuZCBz dWdnZXN0IHRoYXQgdGhpcyBjb3VsZCBiZSBtaXRpZ2F0ZWQgYnkgdXNpbmcgZ29vZCBhdXRoZW50 aWNhdGlvbiBvZiBnaXRodWIgYWNjb3VudHMsIHN1Y2ggYXMgMkZBIG9yIFdlYkF1dGhuLg0KDQo+ IA0KPiBJbiB0aGUgZ3JvdXAgSSBjaGFpciAoSSBjYW4ndCBzZWUgMkZBIHN0YXR1cyBmb3IgZ3Jv dXBzIEkgZG9uJ3QNCj4gYWRtaW5pc3RlciksIDQvOCBjb250cmlidXRvcnMgaGF2ZSAyRkEsIHdo aWNoIHdvdWxkIHNlZW0gdG8gbWFrZSBhIG1hbmRhdGUNCj4gZGlmZmljdWx0IHRvIHJlcXVpcmUu ICBUaGF0IHNhaWQsIGlmIHdlIGFyZSBldmVuIHJlbW90ZWx5IHdvcnJpZWQgYWJvdXQNCj4gcGhp c2hpbmcsIGEgcmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb24gaXMgZ29vZC4NCg0KVHJ1ZSwgYnV0IHRoaXMgaXMgQkNQ L2d1aWRhbmNlIHJhdGhlciB0aGFuIG1hbmRhdGluZy4NCg0KTXkgY29uY2VybiBpcyBsZXNzIGFi b3V0IGxvc2luZyB0aGUgZGF0YSAoc2luY2UgdGhhdCBpcyBiZWluZyBiYWNrZWQgdXApLCBidXQg bW9yZSBhYm91dCBsb3NpbmcgY29udHJvbCBvZiBhbiBhY2NvdW50L29yZ2FuaXphdGlvbiB0aGF0 IGlzIHVuZGVyIHRoZSBJRVRGJ3MgbmFtZS4gIEknbSBub3Qgc3VyZSB3aGF0IHBvbGljaWVzIEdp dGh1YiBoYXMgZm9yIHJlY292ZXJpbmcgYW4gYWNjb3VudC9vcmdhbmlzYXRpb24gdGhhdCBvbmUg bG9zZXMgY29udHJvbCBvdmVyLCBidXQgSSdtIHN1cmUgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgaGFzc2xlLCBhbmQg ZW1iYXJyYXNzaW5nLiANCg0KPiANCj4gPiAtIFBlcmhhcHMgaGF2aW5nIGEgZ2l0aWdub3JlIGZp bGUgdGhhdCBmaWx0ZXJzIG91dCBzdGFuZGFyZCBzc2gga2V5DQo+IG5hbWVzPw0KPiANCj4gVGhh dCBtaWdodCBiZSB0b28gbXVjaCBkZXRhaWwgZm9yIGFuIFJGQy4NCj4gDQo+IFNlZSBhbHNvIGh0 dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LW5vdHRpbmdoYW0taG93LWRpZC10 aGF0LQ0KPiBnZXQtaW50by10aGUtcmVwby8NCj4gDQo+IChJJ2xsIHRha2UgYSBQUiBvbiBteSB0 b29scyBpZiB5b3UgaGF2ZSBzb21ldGhpbmcgY29uY3JldGUsIGJ1dCBJIGRvbid0DQo+IGtub3cg aG93IHRvIHRhcmdldCBTU0gga2V5cyB3aXRoIGEgLmdpdGlnbm9yZTsgSSBndWVzcyBJIGNvdWxk IGp1c3QgYWRkDQo+IGlkX2VkMjU1MTkgYW5kIGlkX3JzYSwgYnV0IHRoYXQgaXNuJ3QgZW5vdWdo LCBzdXJlbHkuICBPciBtYXliZSB0aGF0IGlzDQo+IGVub3VnaC4uLikNCltSV10gDQoNCk5vIGNv bmNyZXRlIHByb3Bvc2FsLCBidXQgcGVyaGFwcyBldmVuIGEgc2ltcGxlIC5naXRpZ25vcmUgbWln aHQgYmUgYmV0dGVyIHRoYW4gbm90aGluZy4NCg0KRldJVzogSXQgaXMgdGhpcyBzb3J0IG9mIGFy dGljbGUgdGhhdCBJIGFtIGNvbmNlcm5lZCBhYm91dDoNCmh0dHBzOi8vbmFrZWRzZWN1cml0eS5z b3Bob3MuY29tLzIwMTkvMDMvMjUvdGhvdXNhbmRzLW9mLWNvZGVycy1hcmUtbGVhdmluZy10aGVp ci1jcm93bi1qZXdlbHMtZXhwb3NlZC1vbi1naXRodWIvDQoNClNvbWUgb2YgdGhlIGNvbnRyaWJ1 dG9ycyB0byBJRVRGIHdpbGwgYmUgcXVpdGUgbmV3IHRvIGdpdC9naXRodWIgZXRjLCBzbyByZWFs bHkgaXQgaXMgYWJvdXQgd2FybmluZyB0aGVtIGFib3V0IHN0dWZmIHRoZXkgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGNh cmVmdWwgdG8gYXZvaWQuICBFdmVuIGEgc2VudGVuY2Ugb3IgdHdvIGluIHRoZSBzZWN1cml0eSBj b25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucyBtaWdodCBoZWxwLg0KDQo+IA0KPiA+IFRoZSB0aGlyZCBwb2ludCBJIGtu b3cgbGVhc3QgYWJvdXQuIEkgdW5kZXJzdGFuZCB0aGF0IHRoZSBwbGFuIGlzIHRoYXQNCj4gPiBJ RVRGIHdpbGwgYmFja3VwIHRoZSByZXBvcyArIGlzc3VlcyArIHdpa2lwYWdlcz8gSG9wZWZ1bGx5 IHRoZQ0KPiA+IGlzc3Vlcy93aWtpcGFnZXMgYXJlIGJhY2tlZCB1cCBpbiBhIGZvcm1hdCB0aGF0 IGEgc2NyaXB0IGNvdWxkIGJlDQo+ID4gd3JpdHRlbiB0byB1cGRhdGUgaW50byBmdXR1cmUgdG9v bHMgaWYgcmVxdWlyZWQuDQo+IA0KPiBUaGlzIGlzIHdvcmsgaW4gcHJvZ3Jlc3MuICBSb2JlcnQg U3BhcmtzIGhhcyBhIGRyYWZ0IHN0YXRlbWVudCBvZiB3b3JrIGFuZA0KPiBJIGV4cGVjdCB0aGF0 IHRvIGdvIG91dCB0byBiaWQgc29vbi4NCj4gDQo+ID4gIDEuICBJdCB3YXMgc2xpZ2h0bHkgdW5j bGVhciB0byBtZSBleGFjdGx5IHdoYXQgdGhlIGZ1bGwgbGlmZWN5Y2xlIG9mDQo+ID4gbWFuYWdp bmcgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGluIGdpdGh1YiBpcyBtZWFudCB0byBiZS4gRS5nLiBpcyBpdCBvbmx5IGZv cg0KPiA+IGRyYWZ0cyB1cCB0byB0aGUgcG9pbnQgdGhhdCB0aGV5IGFyZSBwdWJsaXNoZWQgYXMg UkZDcywgb3IgaXMgdGhlcmUgYW4NCj4gPiBleHBlY3RhdGlvbiB0aGF0IHJlcG9zaXRvcmllcyBj b3VsZCBleGlzdCBmb3IgbG9uZ2VyIHRoYW4gdGhhdCwgZS5nLg0KPiA+IGZvciB0cmFja2luZyBp c3N1ZXMsIGZ1dHVyZSByZXZpc2lvbnMsIG9yIGVycmF0YS4gSSB0aGluayB0aGF0IHRoZXJlDQo+ ID4gYXJlIHNvbWUgc291cmNlIG9mIHRydXRoIGNvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zIGhlcmUgdGhhdCBwZXJo YXBzIG5lZWQgdG8gYmUNCj4gPiBjYXJlZnVsbHkgZG9jdW1lbnRlZCBpbiB0aGUgcmVwbyByZWFk bWUuIEUuZy4gZm9sa3MgcmVhZGluZyB0aGUgZG9jIG9uDQo+ID4gZ2l0aHViIGFyZSBub3QgZ2V0 dGluZyB0aGUgZm9ybWFsIFJGQywgbm8gbm90aWZpY2F0aW9uIGFib3V0IGVycmF0YSwNCj4gPiBl dGMuDQo+IA0KPiBUaGlzIGlzIGZvY3VzZWQgb24gdGhlIHByb2R1Y3Rpb24gcHJvY2Vzcy4gIEkg ZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB3ZSBkbyBhDQo+IGdyZWF0IGpvYiBvZiBjbG9zaW5nIHRoZSBsb29w LiAgU29tZSB3b3JrIHdpdGggdGhlIFJQQyB3YXMgZG9uZSwgYnV0IG5vDQo+IG9uZSBsZWZ0IHRo YXQgcHJvY2VzcyB2ZXJ5IGhhcHB5IGFuZCBpdCBoYXNuJ3QgYmVlbiB0YWtlbiB1cCBhZ2Fpbi4N Cj4gDQo+IEZyb20gbXkgcGVyc3BlY3RpdmUsIEkgc2VlIHRoaXMgYXMgaXRlcmF0aXZlLiAgV2Ug bmVlZCB0byBoYXZlIGJldHRlcg0KPiBwcm9jZXNzZXMgZm9yIGRlYWxpbmcgd2l0aCBtYWludGVu YW5jZSBvZiB3b3JrIHRoYXQgZ29lcyBmb3IgcHVibGljYXRpb24sDQo+IGJ1dCBhIG51bWJlciBv ZiBmYWN0b3JzIHRlbmQgdG8gaW50ZXJmZXJlLiAgUGFydCBvZiB0aGF0IGlzIG91ciBpbnNpc3Rl bmNlDQo+IG9uIGFuIGFyY2hpdmFsIGZvcm1hdCwgcGFydCBvZiBpdCBpcyB0aGUgbGVuZ3RoIG9m IHRpbWUgdGhhdCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbg0KPiB0YWtlcywgcGFydCBvZiB0aGF0IGlzIHRoYXQgd2Ug anVzdCBkb24ndCBoYXZlIHRoaXMgYnVpbHQgaW50byB0aGUgY3VsdHVyZQ0KPiBhbHdheXMuDQpb UlddIA0KDQpZZXMsIEkgYWdyZWUgdGhhdCBhbiBpdGVyYXRpdmUgYXBwcm9hY2ggaXMgZ29vZC4N Cg0KSSB0aGluayB0aGF0IGl0IG1pZ2h0IGJlIGhlbHBmdWwgZWFybHkgaW4gdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50 IGZvciBpdCB0byBzdGF0ZSB0aGF0IHRoZSBzY29wZSBmb2N1cyBvZiB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQgaXMg Zm9yIHRoZSBwcm9ncmVzc2lvbiBvZiBkcmFmdCBkb2N1bWVudHMgdXAgdG8gdGhlIFJGQyBFZGl0 b3Igc3RhZ2UuDQoNCj4gDQo+IE1heWJlIHRoZSBuZXcgSUVTRyBjYW4gY29udGludWUgdG8gd29y ayBvbiB0aGlzIHByb2JsZW0uICBJIGtub3cgdGhhdCB0aGUNCj4gY3VycmVudCBhbmQgcHJldmlv dXMgSUVTR3MgaGF2ZSB0cmllZCBhIG51bWJlciBvZiBhcHByb2FjaGVzLg0KW1JXXSANCg0KQXMg dGhlIGluY29taW5nIE1nbXQgQUQsIEkgY2FyZSBhYm91dCBZQU5HIG1vZGVscywgYW5kIHRoaXMg aXMgb2J2aW91c2x5IG9uZSBvZiB0aGUgYXJlYXMgd2hlcmUgdG9vbGluZyBoZWxwcy4gIFNvbWUg YXV0aG9ycyBhbHJlYWR5IGhhdmUgKHNsaWdodGx5IGhhaXJ5KSBNYWtlZmlsZXMgdGhhdCBhdXRv bWF0ZSB2YXJpb3VzIHN0YWdlcyBvZiB0aGUgd29yaywgb3RoZXJzIGRvIGV2ZXJ5dGhpbmcgbWFu dWFsbHkuICBCdXQgSSBoYXZlIGFuIGludGVyZXN0IGluIHdvcmtpbmcgb3V0IGhvdyBJRVRGIGNh biBiZXR0ZXIgbWFuYWdlL2RldmVsb3AvcmVmaW5lIFlBTkcgbW9kZWxzIHNvIHRoaXMgaXMgc29t ZXRoaW5nIEkgaG9wZSB0byBwdXJzdWUsIHRpbWUgcGVybWl0dGluZyBvZiBjb3Vyc2UuDQoNCk9m ZiB0b3BpYywgSSB0aGluayB0aGF0IGEgVlNDb2RlIGxhbmd1YWdlIHNlcnZlciBwcm90b2NvbCBm b3IgZGV2ZWxvcGluZyBkcmFmdHMgY291bGQgYmUgaW50ZXJlc3RpbmcsIG5vdCBsZWFzdCBiZWNh dXNlIGl0IGhhcyB0aGUgY2FwYWJpbGl0eSBvZiB3b3JraW5nIHdpdGggYW55IGVkaXRvciB0aGF0 IHN1cHBvcnRzIExTUHMuDQoNCg0KPiANCj4gDQo+ID4gLSBQcmVzdW1hYmx5IGFub3RoZXIgcmVh c29uIHdoeSBnaXRodWIgd2FzIGNob3NlbiB3YXNuJ3QganVzdCBiZWNhdXNlDQo+ID4gb2YgbGFy Z2UvYWN0aXZlIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9ycywgYnV0IGFsc28gYmVjYXVzZSB2YXJpb3VzIElFVEYgV0dz IGFyZQ0KPiA+IGFjdGl2ZWx5IG1ha2luZyB1c2Ugb2YgZ2l0aHViIGZvciBtYW5hZ2luZyBkb2N1 bWVudHMg4oCTIEkga25vdyB0aGF0IHdlDQo+ID4gYXJlLg0KPiANCj4gWWVzLiAgSSBjb25zaWRl ciB0aG9zZSBwZW9wbGUgYWxyZWFkeSB3aXRoaW4gdGhlIElFVEYgdG8gYmUgYSBsYXJnZSBwYXJ0 DQo+IG9mIHRoYXQgY29tbXVuaXR5Lg0KPiANCj4gPiAg4oCcVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBvbmx5IGFp bXMgdG8gYWRkcmVzcyB1c2Ugb2YgR2l0SHViIGluIGRldmVsb3BpbmcNCj4gPiBEb2N1bWVudHPi gJ0NCj4gPg0KPiA+IC0gQXMgYWJvdmUgcmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSBjb21tZW50IG9uIGRvY3VtZW50 IGxpZmVjeWNsZSwgaXMgdGhhdCBqdXN0DQo+ID4gdGhyb3VnaCB0byBSRkMgZWRpdG9yLCBvciBi ZXlvbmQ/DQo+IA0KPiBBcyBpdCBzYXlzLCB0aGlzIGlzICJkZXZlbG9waW5nIGRvY3VtZW50cyIu ICBNb3JlIHRvIGJlIGRvbmUsIEkgZ3Vlc3MuDQo+IA0KPiA+IC0gTmljZSwgYnV0IHRoaXMgZG9l c24ndCBhcHBlYXIgdG8gcXVpdGUgZm9sbG93IHRoZSBub3JtYWwgUkZDODE3NA0KPiA+IGJvaWxl cnBsYXRlLiA7LSkNCj4gDQo+IEZpeGVkIGluIG15IGNvcHkgYXQgQmFycnkncyBwcm9tcHRpbmcu DQo+IA0KPiA+ICBFYWNoIG9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbiByZXF1aXJlcyBvd25lcnMuIFRoZSBvd25lciB0 ZWFtIGZvciBhIFdvcmtpbmcNCj4gPiBHcm91cCByZXBvc2l0b3J5IE1VU1QgaW5jbHVkZSByZXNw b25zaWJsZSBBcmVhIERpcmVjdG9ycy4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IC0gU2hvdWxkIHRoaXMgYWxzbyBpbmNs dWRlIElFVEYgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQgKGkuZS4gZm9yIGNvbnNpc3RlbmN5IHdpdGgNCj4gPiB0aGUg Z2l0aHViIGNvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24gZHJhZnQpPw0KPiANCj4gWWVzLiAgSSd2ZSBhZGRlZCB0aGVt IGF0IGEgIlNIT1VMRCIgbGV2ZWwuICBJIHRoaW5rIHRoYXQncyBjb25zaXN0ZW50IHdpdGgNCj4g dGhlIG90aGVyIGRyYWZ0ICh3aGljaCBhdm9pZHMgaWNreSAyMTE5IHdvcmRzKS4NCltSV10gDQpP a2F5LiAgU2VlIGFib3ZlLCBJIG5vdyB3b25kZXIgd2hldGhlciBoYXZpbmcgb3RoZXIgQURzIG1p Z2h0IGJlIGJldHRlciwgZHVlIHRvIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudCBvZiBnaXZpbmcgb3duZXJzaGlwIG9m IGFsbCBXRyBvcmdzIHRvIG9uZSBwZXJzb24uDQoNCj4gDQo+ID4gLSBTaG91bGQgSUVURiBnaXRo dWIgcmVwb3NpdG9yaWVzIG5vdCBhbHNvIGhhdmUgYSBMSUNFTlNFIGZpbGU/IEUuZy4NCj4gPiBp biBhbGlnbm1lbnQgd2l0aCB0aGUgTm90ZS13ZWxsPw0KPiANCj4gWWVzLiAgTXkgdG9vbHMgcHJv dmlkZSBhIGRlZmF1bHQgb25lIHRoYXQgc2F5cyAiU2VlIHRoZSBndWlkZWxpbmVzIGZvcg0KPiBj b250cmlidXRpb25zLiINCj4gDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8vZ2l0aHViLmNvbS9tYXJ0aW50aG9tc29uL2kt ZC0NCj4gdGVtcGxhdGUvYmxvYi9tYXN0ZXIvdGVtcGxhdGUvTElDRU5TRS5tZA0KPiANCj4gQXMg dGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCByZWxhdGVzIHRvIGNvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbnMsIGFuZCB0aGUgLWNvbmZpZ3Vy YXRpb24gZHJhZnQNCj4gYWxyZWFkeSBtZW50aW9ucyB0aGUgTElDRU5TRSBmaWxlLCBJIHRoaW5r IHdlJ3JlIGNvdmVyZWQgYWRlcXVhdGVseQ0KPiB3aXRob3V0IGdldHRpbmcgaW50byB0aGF0Lg0K W1JXXSANCk9rYXkuDQoNCj4gDQo+ID4gIENoYWlycyBNVVNUIGludm9sdmUgQXJlYSBEaXJlY3Rv cnMgaW4gYW55IGRlY2lzaW9uIHRvIHVzZSBHaXRIdWIgZm9yDQo+ID4gYW55dGhpbmcgbW9yZSB0 aGFuIG1hbmFnaW5nIGRyYWZ0cy4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IC0gSXMgaXQgY2xlYXIgd2hhdCAiZHJhZnQi IG1lYW5zIGhlcmU/IFdvdWxkIOKAnEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ04oCdIGJlDQo+ID4gYmV0dGVyPyBJ dCBtaWdodCBiZSB3b3J0aCBjaGVja2luZyBvdGhlciB1c2FnZSBvZiBkcmFmdCBpbiB0aGUgZG9j dW1lbnQuDQo+IA0KPiBQbGVhc2Ugc2VlIGh0dHBzOi8vZ2l0aHViLmNvbS9pZXRmLWdpdHdnL3Vz aW5nLWdpdGh1Yi9wdWxsLzQzIHdoaWNoDQo+IGluY2x1ZGVzIHRleHQgdGhhdCBJIHRoaW5rIGdy ZWF0bHkgaW1wcm92ZXMgdGhpcy4NCj4gDQo+ID4gLSBJIHN1Z2dlc3Qg4oCcc2hvdWxk4oCdIHJh dGhlciB0aGFuIFNIT1VMRCBmb3IgYm90aCBvZiB0aGVzZS4NCj4gDQo+IEkgYWdyZWUuICBOb25l IG9mIHRoaXMgbmVlZHMgbm9ybWF0aXZlIGZvcmNlLg0KPiANCj4gPiAg4oCcQSBkb2N1bWVudCBl ZGl0b3IgY2FuIHN0aWxsIHVzZSBHaXRIdWIgaW5kZXBlbmRlbnRseSBmb3IgZG9jdW1lbnRzDQo+ ID4gWy4uLl0NCj4gPg0KPiA+IC0gSSBhZ3JlZSB3aXRoIHRoZSBzZW50aW1lbnQgaGVyZSwgYnV0 IEkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB0aGVyZSBwZXJoYXBzDQo+ID4gc2hvdWxkIGJlIHNvbWUgbW9yZSBydWxl czoNCj4gPg0KPiA+ICAtIElzIHRoZSBhc3N1bXB0aW9uIHRoYXQgdGhpcyByZXBvc2l0b3J5IGlz IG5vdCB1bmRlciBpZXRmLXdnLTxuYW1lPj8NCj4gDQo+IE5vLiAgVGhvdWdoIHRoYXQgaXMgYSBk aXNjdXNzaW9uIHRvIGhhdmUgYmV0d2VlbiBjaGFpcnMgYW5kIGVkaXRvcnMuICBTb21lDQo+IGdy b3VwcyBhcmUgY29tZm9ydGFibGUgd2l0aCBpbmRpdmlkdWFsIHN1Ym1pc3Npb25zIGxpdmluZyBp biB0aGUgV0cgb3JnLA0KPiBvdGhlcnMgYXJlIGNvbmNlcm5lZCBhYm91dCB3aGF0IHRoYXQgbWln aHQgaW1wbHkuDQpbUlddIA0KDQpJIGFncmVlIG5vdCB0byBzcGVjaWZ5IHRoaXMuDQoNCg0KPiAN Cj4gPiAgLSBJZiBub3QsIHBlcmhhcHMgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBzaG91bGQgcmVjb21tZW5kZWQg YSBzdGF0ZW1lbnQgdGhhdA0KPiA+IHRoZSByZXBvc2l0b3J5IGlzIGZvciB1c2UgYnkgdGhlIGF1 dGhvcnMgYW5kIGRvZXMgbm90IG5lY2Vzc2FyaWx5DQo+ID4gcmVmbGVjdCB0aGUgcHJvY2VkdXJl cyBkZWZpbmVkIGluIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtZ2l0LXVzaW5nLWdpdGh1YiwgYW5kDQo+ID4gdGhhdCB0 aGUgV0cgd29yayBmb3JtYWxseSBoYXBwZW5zIG9uIHRoZSBXRyBlbWFpbCBhbGlhcy4NCj4gDQo+ IEkgZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgd2UgY2FuIHJlYXNvbmFibHkgZXhwZWN0IHRvIGxldnkgcmVxdWlyZW1l bnRzIG9uIHdvcmsgdGhhdA0KPiBoYXBwZW5zIGVzc2VudGlhbGx5IG91dHNpZGUgb2YgdGhlc2Ug cHJvY2Vzc2VzLCBleGNlcHQgdG8gdGhlIGV4dGVudCB0aGF0DQo+IHdlIGluc2lzdCBvbiB0aGUg bm90aWNlLiAgRXZlbiB0aGF0IGlzIHN0cmV0Y2hpbmcgaXQgYSBsaXR0bGUgdG8gbXkgbWluZC4N CltSV10gDQpQZXJoYXBzLg0KDQpGV0lXLCBpdCBpcyB0aGlzIHNvcnQgb2YgaXNzdWUgdGhhdCBJ IGFtIGNvbmNlcm5lZCBhYm91dDoNCmh0dHBzOi8vbmV0d29ya2VuZ2luZWVyaW5nLnN0YWNrZXhj aGFuZ2UuY29tL3F1ZXN0aW9ucy80NDAxMC9pcy1pcHYxMC1hLWpva2Utb3ItYS1zZXJpb3VzLXJm Yy1kcmFmdA0KDQo+IA0KPiA+ICAtIElmIHRoZXNlIGFyZSBwdWJsaWMgcmVwb3NpdG9yaWVzIHRo ZW4gSSB3b3VsZCB0aG91Z2h0IHRoYXQgZXZlcnlvbmUNCj4gPiBoYXMgcmVhZCBhY2Nlc3MgYW55 d2F5LCBhbmQgY2FuIGhhdmUgaXNzdWVzIGFzc2lnbmVkIHRvIHRoZW0sIGV0Yy4NCj4gDQo+IFlv dSBuZWVkIHRvIGJlIHBhcnQgb2YgdGhlIG9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbiBiZWZvcmUgeW91IGNhbiBiZSBh c3NpZ25lZCB3b3JrLg0KPiBJIHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgYXZvaWRzIEdpdEh1YiBmcm9tIGRlYWxpbmcg d2l0aCBhIHNwZWNpZmljIGNsYXNzIG9mIHNwYW0uDQpbUlddIA0KQWgsIG9rYXkuDQoNCj4gDQo+ ID4gIFJldmlzaW9ucyB1c2VkIHRvIGdlbmVyYXRlIGRvY3VtZW50cyB0aGF0IGFyZSBzdWJtaXR0 ZWQgYXMgSW50ZXJuZXQtDQo+ID4gRHJhZnRzIFNIT1VMRCBiZSB0YWdnZWQgaW4gcmVwb3NpdG9y aWVzIHRvIHByb3ZpZGUgYSByZWNvcmQgb2YNCj4gPiBzdWJtaXNzaW9ucy4NCj4gPg0KPiA+ICAt IFBlcmhhcHMgc3VnZ2VzdCB0aGUgZm9ybWF0IG9mIHRoZSB0YWcuIEkuZS4gdGhlIHRhZyBzaG91 bGQganVzdCBiZQ0KPiA+IHRoZSBuYW1lL3ZlcnNpb24gb2YgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGJlaW5nIHB1Ymxp c2hlZC4gW0lkZWFsbHksIGxvbmdlciB0ZXJtDQo+ID4gd2Ugd291bGQgaGF2ZSB0b29saW5nIHRv IGhlbHAgd2l0aCB0aGlzLl0NCj4gDQo+IFdlIGRvIGluZGVlZCBoYXZlIHRvb2xpbmcgYW5kIGRv Y3VtZW50YXRpb24sIGJ1dCBJIGRvbid0IHdhbnQgdG8gcHJlc2NyaWJlDQo+IGEgc3BlY2lmaWMg Zm9ybWF0IGluIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgbGlrZSB0aGlzIChJIHdhcyBpbiB0aGUgcm91Z2ggcmVnYXJk aW5nDQo+IHRoZSBvcmcgbmFtaW5nIGNvbnZlbnRpb24pLiAgQ29udmVudGlvbiB3b3VsZCBzZWVt IHRvIHN1ZmZpY2UgaGVyZS4NCltSV10gDQpPa2F5Lg0KDQo+IA0KPiBTZWUgaHR0cHM6Ly9naXRo dWIuY29tL21hcnRpbnRob21zb24vaS1kLQ0KPiB0ZW1wbGF0ZS9ibG9iL21hc3Rlci9kb2MvU1VC TUlUVElORy5tZA0KDQpUaGFua3MsDQpSb2INCg0K From nobody Fri Mar 13 05:25:33 2020 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 998573A16FD; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:25:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 yYQy0Yfa5Xly; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:25:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-il1-x12b.google.com (mail-il1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12b]) (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 3931A3A16FB; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:25:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id e8so8657996ilc.13; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:25:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=rm1yCODhbJCSLZjcZL0WF3mpoNE5Id+sK0SsUxQO4sY=; b=STA4SLcdpxDpouoG+bVN2oqYxL6dNiTwYu2tz/m0Sacs1VBy9/ffklG/Oyxg5JI04m llAD0DnP30WtfDZcgQC73ejUwB31E3+9vgxsz5muf3YxNsg+W8Rw5XUQHOmByR5gnRPw AfYaW9xoD0LMpdjWaBYsKTIFrjDMa2IlV1aLgyv62zc1SvzgkS3i7QZNgQH83Sux7PQl oHhFfZiGEYgpc/zybH6b9DVanJLDROn1DAXDVbrQVPUSlSKz4Om/llI//sL3oH7UUzPu aAdMjPI7kiPov0ROS4Vddanea11/5O2WmFpRZ0x/jVOhqNR11eShYn1iVNkg5yEqyFbs 93QQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=rm1yCODhbJCSLZjcZL0WF3mpoNE5Id+sK0SsUxQO4sY=; b=Z2clVbYQUVDFnH9+oJkYpkXzQzb4rp2Q1j6yMvyBZVm+h65RgJN40kcd18q22cPPCB fkt0tjcpWiYg+cgqjqG0ZnL5uONXQIGsk6xtEv3ldsHS3pdsIJdlSaHDxMvosbUl+zNh nGhw2eIGA41BrYd5BqcFe3lvjmBQi9ha0jsIbIFGMPG9laigqFvM87q8+MiHtqRlmXUB 6qsUllGv+ZR2WB7GQhXnb00V+scxEXbWcaxzZJ1XOmzbQ/SJekUHGBtYs0kLxmHAot1d uf9RdRXPybCxSZ3R1sCrdsvZnh3lWd3+gFJKf8/l4lFENXoC7f4Pk1ZJ3w4YhSm/Q0fb F9jg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0phTdVz58qMXmQG6P4lzfrifE98XWeP9DwfwQRIfzH9UOWJyvE Ja4nD1pOsf7SdldMcyhVqG8eDkaDONW0YwbNNkFzN1/ATvPfLQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsfiAnZS+SCsgmEkkmQE3PTwBRP60YbYPYhnSJOEFPTkMpVSYXrgTWEoxvhk7Tblm6gtdrje1lxSmizXGVOgBA= X-Received: by 2002:a92:280a:: with SMTP id l10mr13771480ilf.49.1584102318159; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:25:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <03a88995-a64b-4214-a408-1e826f3ecc9a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Rob Sayre Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 22:25:04 +1000 Message-ID: To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" Cc: Martin Thomson , The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Christopher Wood Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f63bf505a0bb8f9d" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 12:25:22 -0000 --000000000000f63bf505a0bb8f9d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:03 PM Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > > My concern is less about losing the data (since that is being backed up), > but more about losing control of an account/organization that is under the > IETF's name. I'm not sure what policies Github has for recovering an > account/organisation that one loses control over, but I'm sure it would be > hassle, and embarrassing. > How is this different from any other system the IETF might use? thanks, Rob --000000000000f63bf505a0bb8f9d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:03 PM Rob Wilt= on (rwilton) <rwilton=3D40= cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

My concern is less about losing the data (since that is being backed up), b= ut more about losing control of an account/organization that is under the I= ETF's name.=C2=A0 I'm not sure what policies Github has for recover= ing an account/organisation that one loses control over, but I'm sure i= t would be hassle, and embarrassing.

H= ow is this different from any other system the IETF might use?
thanks,
Rob=C2=A0
=C2=A0
--000000000000f63bf505a0bb8f9d-- From nobody Fri Mar 13 05:32:52 2020 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 160153A1719; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:32:50 -0700 (PDT) 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, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=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=nokia.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 yDJWZMO6_V-J; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EUR03-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr50137.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.5.137]) (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 528E73A1616; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 05:32:48 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=P0TGiG5s/A7ukoJYZByzjvaNBxOo2087j5m+G7Gc67UAkMdB3/gx99y27TpsLZJJLkhD3SnbPEAAN3erBLq688w148IYTF1+Vx2KCcrU9Ih2sXci069H92eEZgjdwXjAu2k9qGSxgRknpfuD8ZVdnbPBSYSiqI+nJEuqB3+du8frEdI9PKb+MzfBiBJLWeuQrqOskOpQPJUyMxSnVLV67kP4zQ02g8pp3OW7CWid3q31OWj0xcz9S6LOhLy3T4bZvNODRqSGslSbQ+g5DPJ4LeYPxr38WPetNbT9erSEHNfEN9bt2mW/1uVktHUPvmFy0zZg/kkwjpeKwl33/78k0w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=VAaiL7n8K6O+c6fN+K3Xo1m0oSKrUdo6Nqk3l9KYlYA=; b=EYsCJFOMAHhBIyjBXiLm0U/mXpH/2miesRqDA8NSorwN+sjfWt+etnTHE0TCOUgmsp/h5SceGBxfzfF+a9Zx0mo4qovgRLKCP50VGMssYQZ2pn3UudcW+XzlHwetv1d7uUIz8CJ3F0dTSmRWSYWV3PqDrkukCtxIXZbR0iOw4Ovpfb/xecoObFaJqHQlDojaI+9FAzh2rra/M8ZVRgy57hpGrVCVUAJY2nbjjIDz4YWYx97gv3sfcxQSpEy0WQUBHW5DxdxEXwz+bpuG1y3SSsuzwjej39TXZqn7vWd6ReydsQoS0nvSmfdCHbNbrAcSGrMAteBF3dFvsZqNUq7YQw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nokia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nokia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nokia.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nokia.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-nokia-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=VAaiL7n8K6O+c6fN+K3Xo1m0oSKrUdo6Nqk3l9KYlYA=; b=oco/8fHGe3aouLbYUMymRUhAhcLStoRwmrwdSkjOKdZWSRL+F0GeQA2z6xj2NuICCGl1KydyjwUi/LIh3NuQkndi8GQ3SJRKNOth6/Gy9VHSFaYgwGzQWinPEx62XCaOZouqdQkUbYOQytnSNkKmjl7QtDBqiFFAodenf2Pzen8= Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=martin.vigoureux@nokia.com; Received: from DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (52.134.96.142) by DB7PR07MB5370.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.178.85.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.9; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:32:45 +0000 Received: from DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::291c:8a9a:c0e7:b49c]) by DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::291c:8a9a:c0e7:b49c%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2814.007; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:32:45 +0000 To: Martin Thomson , The IESG Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood References: <158401082788.18076.104688218811852864@ietfa.amsl.com> <9322ba71-dd46-4c8c-aca5-78928c631e19@www.fastmail.com> From: Martin Vigoureux Message-ID: <4bb03592-21be-51a2-28e7-14f23969fbb4@nokia.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:32:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 In-Reply-To: <9322ba71-dd46-4c8c-aca5-78928c631e19@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: PR2P264CA0038.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:101:1::26) To DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:5:1::14) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from [172.30.2.231] (131.228.2.21) by PR2P264CA0038.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:101:1::26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.16 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:32:44 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [131.228.2.21] X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-HT: Tenant X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 1d9e8619-7373-4117-1a56-08d7c74aa206 X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: DB7PR07MB5370: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:8882; X-Forefront-PRVS: 034119E4F6 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4636009)(39860400002)(136003)(366004)(396003)(376002)(346002)(199004)(44832011)(2616005)(26005)(186003)(478600001)(956004)(66476007)(6486002)(66946007)(66556008)(54906003)(4744005)(110136005)(16576012)(316002)(6666004)(8676002)(5660300002)(31696002)(36756003)(86362001)(31686004)(52116002)(8936002)(4326008)(81156014)(81166006)(2906002)(966005)(16526019); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB7PR07MB5370; H:DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: nokia.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: oJcmURG3GvyGD2ZATjOfMzCR5kz8SVwmK6c4M7yaA4/2Zim99i71cDoQXiX07aTvP7yfLas5HE6M6NrnvoFy+L4XzDa7uHEJns39mu8EPqvmIwveFeRSIdapXlptQJvQvDsQ5aSqWPPb7x76+wXREQ== X-OriginatorOrg: nokia.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1d9e8619-7373-4117-1a56-08d7c74aa206 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Mar 2020 12:32:45.7290 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 5d471751-9675-428d-917b-70f44f9630b0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: H9UL/xOkhVbm2A1pZlCjxg3IDg8uY8fajraX2so7OzL1CrKroSwVmBueqWNBEeWzGZdnOLY8r8uxuEhST1cEBt9sEmeZYPDXcERiojzATHk= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB7PR07MB5370 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 12:32:50 -0000 Hello Martin thank you for looking at this. Ideally I would have also liked s/Each Working Group/The Working Group/ but I agree with you that the new sentence does the job of setting the context in which to read the document. -m Le 2020-03-13 à 4:10, Martin Thomson a écrit : > Hi Martin, > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, at 22:00, Martin Vigoureux via Datatracker wrote: >> What I'd really like to see is some clarifications added such that it is clear >> that these recommandations are not for all IETF WGs. > > Without adding a caveat to every recommendation, do you think that the changes in https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46/files address your central concern? > > Those are very prominent statements and I believe that they will help establish the right expectations. > From nobody Fri Mar 13 06:47:59 2020 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 319BD3A073E; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:47:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=kaloom.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 4RXDyW2Ri4YN; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:47:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CAN01-QB1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr660123.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.66.123]) (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 22C553A073D; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:47:45 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=lf9VgG0CWgScuvG/2Iql2rxWV5+5W00s/Lo56pvPTaLqWzEuyD2iCFZl4i5iqF4/7L07XOOhT4iRNWn4I2+xuWvJqCM+QEF96+joax+E4k3fXOFybfmAjhU01qvFIFqpfTlByRWLPiACqz2++MwicOfNKAy+5+bjafjfMNMRNO785pMN3rokwqN/rGu3vnMdUd6sMqFupMoHOPS4p/CH/RkBrcfGJSTU0oz3Aps71mqMSe7qBJKasGXISJE00e9NDT9yGj4KiwbpiL0XtrrSkBZBCftQO3pwyU/qlAPS6Pk7nQ/RLcDyerf393gTRvJv2X5C30hG9rpwPmj7mvSksA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=jktRpRmfTMHyrfNaPC1FPYgSnQ33WuKjAUHxsfwTEKI=; b=ffXiZJ9RTkzrNylwTx/HxZ7CJbQ8sjr1ok0iivgww3Awb6kRZEKZnTYkeP9etmKpSWw2c5Q7EY8YXKpk0hs1NcRUNijeLNkAhKjxDzInGh8uf08p0HmhULXOgCcxWP+5SFBg9TXlxu+aSX64lmPREy85oSoQ2Al5RnwNZsuxjXjkYyyGXOI/okeEBQ6SGAYchDbSRUSo8+wQVHtw3/n8c35NdaJN2sio644+Tg5MlntVmfaDMVN6qHFPaUQQ+g8YH8NzJSVfbs8OmYwrT8zCe9c/XuM9fU0EK+xbAx996FwRGc9+T8k65O/ICou10iTS0CDkHnEx1k++VJG36eZLFg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kaloom.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=kaloom.com; dkim=pass header.d=kaloom.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kaloom.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=jktRpRmfTMHyrfNaPC1FPYgSnQ33WuKjAUHxsfwTEKI=; b=lyYVOTpLDAHXuWxHSdiRJET0AaB3gr2OPK+5mF27YxerJTOrlWBiujNBF/J1M9DNBdhGwmayMlvkNdxTXtmLH+jeARmzZYSS0jE+iXpBffOypLG5AEaHB8khcRTG0dT2I0usL4mhmyRHV4HoEJ+/dH+mgq4Sl3kgGXJyxE4+V00= Received: from YTBPR01MB3230.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.255.13.10) by YTBPR01MB3135.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.255.13.79) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.16; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:47:43 +0000 Received: from YTBPR01MB3230.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::7805:d3f7:6a27:6836]) by YTBPR01MB3230.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::7805:d3f7:6a27:6836%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2814.018; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:47:43 +0000 From: Suresh Krishnan To: Martin Thomson CC: The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , Christopher Wood Thread-Topic: Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV+NGzzglEqhing06Qf4PzgaeTXahGiksA Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:47:43 +0000 Message-ID: References: <158401979264.18068.9716500170360894296@ietfa.amsl.com> <67d5daba-c463-4b93-bd7d-54991ae2c29a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <67d5daba-c463-4b93-bd7d-54991ae2c29a@www.fastmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Suresh@kaloom.com; x-originating-ip: [45.19.110.76] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4b0227b8-c27b-4ad4-f424-08d7c7551ad2 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: YTBPR01MB3135: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 034119E4F6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(396003)(346002)(366004)(376002)(39850400004)(136003)(199004)(81156014)(76116006)(66476007)(6506007)(86362001)(26005)(53546011)(8936002)(81166006)(91956017)(8676002)(6486002)(36756003)(5660300002)(6512007)(2906002)(33656002)(186003)(66946007)(508600001)(66556008)(2616005)(71200400001)(66574012)(66446008)(6916009)(4326008)(64756008)(54906003)(316002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:YTBPR01MB3135; H:YTBPR01MB3230.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: kaloom.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: QMwr2cNGMZubvQV2amDLqCSMXIQr4PzJNNaIr2zUFg0ZCgME45Ga1T2++BnzRWX/x2LZSws3jHAg9Grh2PbygF6E6SoDDcfuqUU5WwIrg/E62QGDANsgjkLh9HEVlnRwiCvxMBDQUGUrWiyR8pcy9g== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: kaloom.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4b0227b8-c27b-4ad4-f424-08d7c7551ad2 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Mar 2020 13:47:43.1435 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 47d58e26-f796-48e8-ac40-1c365c204513 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: rOdmV25y4S1bgyryZKXa7VeIf97koeYpMcOOMX4fDsSJ2mhGK/xMBFKyzMkdY0NiC9Nd1UtM3ABQ12QoueGbeg== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: YTBPR01MB3135 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 13:47:49 -0000 Hi Martin, > On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:52 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: >=20 > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 00:29, Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker wrote: >> There is only one thing I would like to >> propose. In Section 6 regarding I-D publication it would be good if ther= e is a >> recommendation (for chairs/editors) to summarize the issues addressed by= the >> revision especially for the benefit of the WG participants who don't use= github. >=20 > I think that's a very good suggestion. >=20 > What we've found is that this isn't worse than before, but there is poten= tially an increase in the rate of change that motivates better reporting to= the WG. In QUIC, we use a combination of things, but changelogs are the m= ost heavily relied upon (I know, because I get lots of feedback about my fr= equent screwups). All other such efforts have relied on the same basic mec= hanism. >=20 > That to me suggests the following, added to Section 4.3 (https://ietf-git= wg.github.io/using-github/draft-ietf-git-using-github.html#name-monitoring-= activity), not Section 6: >=20 >> Additionally, clear reporting about the changes that were included in ea= ch > revision of an Internet-Draft helps ensure that contributors are able to > follow activity. This might be achieved by requesting that editors provi= de a > change log that captures substantive changes to the document in each revi= sion. >=20 > Does that sound reasonable? =20 That sounds great. Thank you. Regards Suresh From nobody Fri Mar 13 06:49:06 2020 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 852563A0766; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:49:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=heapingbits.net header.b=VVRnTC5o; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=UYenyYYr 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 p_aSnWC0nAFT; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:49:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CEAB3A074B; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:49:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C82B74F; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:49:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap4 ([10.202.2.54]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:49:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heapingbits.net; h=mime-version:message-id:date:from:to:cc:subject:content-type; s=fm3; bh=scAdPSEozC6piyJMnW+JmP/H59M92DnFCcQLo0Ja60w=; b=VVRnT C5oYAWRWfXmHrAs2WbU9EjPlv6p9lGNtImaKOYXSJ7H80XyYC6Wl0HBEpXuXAqOF ZMPmHNadGHVzmmSWkdKdARpRHPTS8Ptwnt7k32pLtFjMpB0M8Ux4yJESFIdft4mu 4A2s5r61HZNOrr6RINEYzANF1BJPRGH7gLGsOcoZEXc9G/mVhH+1o2oFN0bgyGAI 0gI08Af5RK+j+ZLMEuGD6ZCJqw4lzc0IsYB92AJU1ijtz/ZNiwk5OFzVZYr/oaqL E6o/iPMmnkszBU8u43sBedK2zCk1ZD8EgIu38A9Ihsi4mxFagp06nio7eo+IVqOw 19jDz/PHHGez3PY8A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=scAdPSEozC6piyJMnW+JmP/H59M92 DnFCcQLo0Ja60w=; b=UYenyYYrTkS6V4D7pqISvtztlPb4sbdmbh7jQngajN6eI L8D7IRZGP0SD9RLhRGB7a3TO9EGOWrf43AeRqHv9JkX1Y+/dFi1uWI1dHXSSLjTL Xuz3FAUTvzLa/ztOQDcs5osdzjCWI6stxtf1MS/SY/Lx6ooRmd3Y1U4rONdTebka jDu5NpOTWNjWtalySZDe+xm+GooBlnH01MgG+PT5E/ruEhCRtESoFbu3k3ye9JVb /epDpKZknmba5hx8sBHOJqJd9AbEG6SogZU7OTmL1a/+WB3lPfph1U9Zb4/hQ8LT +grzGa7Z57gcgh7jwM6DiVEfBWArRP+Gt+20OJ9Bg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvjedgheejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfffhffvufgtsehttdertd erreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfvehhrhhishhtohhphhgvrhcuhghoohgufdcuoegtrgifsehh vggrphhinhhgsghithhsrdhnvghtqeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrh grmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegtrgifsehhvggrphhinhhgsghithhsrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 79C0A3C00A1; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:48:59 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <07e5360a-5b55-4346-b2b4-382b9242e383@www.fastmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:48:30 -0700 From: "Christopher Wood" To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Propose_changing_draft-ietf-git-usin?= =?utf-8?q?g-github_from_BCP_to_Informational?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 13:49:05 -0000 During last call, some folks suggested draft-ietf-git-using-github is better suited as an Informational rather than BCP document. This seems like a minor and inconsequential change, though I'd like to hear from the WG to understand if folks object. To that end, if you disagree with this change, can you please let us know why? Thanks! Chris From nobody Fri Mar 13 06:52:34 2020 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 48D193A0820 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:52:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=cooperw.in header.b=G7H+vZX4; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=2sqNkpGd 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 rVWyFrksGUR8 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:52:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89D023A081C for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:52:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D120A74A for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:52:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:52:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; s=fm2; bh=G8dQg8YdWy g4C2d0PGOWlVZyrK62oWV+FC5uQa0Q+wI=; b=G7H+vZX4BmBHDBPlCZT/gnJ2XY bWltGDPsHLCsIHK23vifhtQVn/6yVfPMe7+CHLJIWhBZmBvefvF1Vr7k2nBhgcQN iyXQeramw4xgKusNbbe2+eA+2VJNRUGNq46mrEG4aisAqsbPJb5zTKxy30JuRFg4 PGXtBd4N93z2/iiXCZVgiO2nIMvOg/3BDcd5JxWkB+wDl2O8NSDFZTmLTO49+mHd zzp6wVXpsd7ZcfaCTPtvJLaroPRivSQiPQzMBM60hbC9gQnCkiW2og7tO/CCAqyq j+CXHFXA1+wKKbHhfOEYjr+LlVw0KeRvSLZmZ+n/kOmqIxm4K2zhsv5He0cA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=G8dQg8YdWyg4C2d0PGOWlVZyrK62oWV+FC5uQa0Q+ wI=; b=2sqNkpGdp+ONRB7pPzgS7b7EIbWewmMHBNyih1WQz8/PNnOkdyarHymqw Od5hg9bjwXrqS7it24DkDmmyopunXNdTDU5R9QKB0M04lcWjncX6EsXFnqrP0e+Y A1XJTHPXiQPquihmSpk7K8wNe3QS/mEb3cN5gplh6bY3wyje4JvdaSrbYMys1Vdp qPOiASBBUbrBaQGi67xeEPoYADgfsTPR/LUKCmK62D0RcPUKIReLXKdiSK8YpW8x mA+sppQQzfXLJ2N+WXvJppWMATrq98kn+7AzesU0vP6rGL6GIeyOP0iSTWPbBarZ mYgDuHv2bR1imAV5S1HLd1AxW4Pzw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvjedgheekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefhtgfgggfuffhfvfgjkffosehtqh hmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhishhsrgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegt ohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepudejfe drfeekrdduudejrdekieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgr ihhlfhhrohhmpegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhn X-ME-Proxy: Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.86]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 339063061363 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:52:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Alissa Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:52:24 -0400 References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <03958aff-0e58-1fc6-8d50-ca38f8221ce6@gmail.com> <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <3B60E587-C8A5-4A2C-8D8F-33FAD96E21CE@cooperw.in> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 13:52:33 -0000 Given the message from Chris about informational vs. BCP, I will wait on = this. Alissa > On Mar 12, 2020, at 10:16 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote: >=20 > WG: >=20 > Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I said I = would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if no one from = the WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP number when it = is published. >=20 > Alissa >=20 >=20 >> On Mar 12, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>=20 >> I am indifferent about this being part of BCP 25. Brian suggested it = so I added the note. I=E2=80=99m happy to remove the note if necessary.=20= >>=20 >> Alissa >>=20 >>=20 >>> On Mar 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Alvaro Retana = wrote: >>>=20 >>> On March 11, 2020 at 3:32:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Brian: >>>=20 >>> Hi! >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> DISCUSS: >>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>=20 >>>>> This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this = document as a >>>>> BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF = community. >>>>>=20 >>>>> The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >>>>>=20 >>>>> The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet = Standards >>>>> Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether = working >>>>> groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support = their >>>>> work will remain entirely at their discretion. >>>>>=20 >>>>> However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working = Group >>>>> Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it = represents >>>>> consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision = "to use >>>>> GitHub or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their = discretion.." >>>>=20 >>>> Would a sentence to that effect in the Abstract and Introduction = help? >>>=20 >>> It wouldn't hurt, but it also doesn't help with my issue: having = this >>> document be part of BCP 25. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> .... >>>>> IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this = document >>>>> belongs in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be = part of >>>>> BCP 25, are the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG = to discuss >>>>> this topic. >>>>=20 >>>> Have things changed? In the old days this question (which BCP = number?) was >>>> typically left to the discretion of the RFC Editor, possibly with a = bit of >>>> discussion with the AD. I certainly don't object to community = discussion, of >>>> course (and we did do that in the case of BCP 101 recently). >>>=20 >>> No, I don't think things have changed. In this case, the AD added a >>> note to the RFC Editor requesting them to "append this document to = BCP >>> 25 at the time of publication." >>>=20 >>> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/writeup/ >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> However, I believe that BCP 25 is a special case because it applies >>> directly to WG operation. The intention of adding documents to it >>> should (at least) be clear and some discussion should exist. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Thanks! >>>=20 >>> Alvaro. >>>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >=20 From nobody Fri Mar 13 10:57:36 2020 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 2C7313A058F; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:57:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=BWtSqDCV; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=tf6Wxk6P 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 l9Dajr7QmkJE; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:57:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBD2E3A053F; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:57:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=17666; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584122249; x=1585331849; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=FIkXvE6NXo2hKSfPglDONMiuTKhLvNs9/BOEQHVUlww=; b=BWtSqDCVqVa9DT4bquhPOCk49U5N6Ygax2vVLlVLJfAeC6YfoWs9vM3T iDv5wl5JAJqqdiqr7FU5UQMiee50LvSgcypVSCGyAZc1PDxxIhujau+Kx rfGxH6YOL1a4H63/yXav7WOCk8dtTecmWPe5kxYCkZXkoGvyHCgymf3MY 8=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AbBiv4RHlruCG0XIJNjFh051GYnJ96bzpIg4Y7I?= =?us-ascii?q?YmgLtSc6Oluo7vJ1Hb+e4z1A3SRYuO7fVChqKWqK3mVWEaqbe5+HEZON0pNV?= =?us-ascii?q?cejNkO2QkpAcqLE0r+eeT1bigmG8JqX15+9Hb9Ok9QS47z?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AkCQCVyGte/4gNJK1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBJS8kLAVsWCAECyoKhAuDRQOKcIJfkzaEYoFCgRADVAkBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?MAQEnBgIEAQGEQwIXggYkOBMCAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBQRthVYMhWMBAQEBAxI?= =?us-ascii?q?RChMBAQYxAQ8CAQgRBAEBFhIDAgICMBQJCAEBBA4FCBpTgjKBfU0DLgEOoW0?= =?us-ascii?q?CgTmIYnWBMoJ/AQEFVoRUGIIMAwaBOIwuGoFBP4ERR4JNPoJkAQECgRwpICs?= =?us-ascii?q?JCYJSMoIskDQ7hXYkmTQKgjyHVo82kxiIKZgDkloCBAIEBQIOAQEFgWkigUQ?= =?us-ascii?q?LAQhwFYMnUBgNjh2Dc4pVdAIEgSOKd4EiAXgXAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,549,1574121600"; d="scan'208,217";a="732821101" Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 13 Mar 2020 17:57:26 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (xch-aln-005.cisco.com [173.36.7.15]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02DHvQcM016473 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:57:26 GMT Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (173.36.7.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:57:09 -0500 Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:57:09 -0500 Received: from NAM10-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:57:08 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=i6QzJreeALpWylQfrSd0DQFCfowlT5onC/h/XI0J73nkkKu8OvW/5fdb7+OE59t89It7zYpIkR7vxjhp4zP2UG7qxSsOsUmKRrIiPU9ouissl5prUbl6Wx5MFJ8Ns9lpf28wTJmkJgEdjjDuYQvmHt/g6KULAgQPLS2gUzPhyOHU/u4gLqk6s74nHs5o7KipyGM+o1jADaKgGgTSExPPOZhVkZygIlqEcvk74bdzDBep0lXslbeBeWBsfpFjECItLEnznjbX65CDmu9yogQ8dTRe1NlkSi1WngNjtZ1QVlKzaPdNfGVXb6WqNiFACTYLzq28TlmctKBVndbsjDg+yA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=FIkXvE6NXo2hKSfPglDONMiuTKhLvNs9/BOEQHVUlww=; b=ApB0cL+NrdegU7xjV/Z9ZAKt4j+kFWpMFz6cu7F4sq44ESgDYzMbedy2+3jWi4YYM8ou/YnM/f37tidzcBKfdK7L7rcAvxbeGReaBwk2EU54NFbw5GPWUr3y329zFUgbcw8HMLuO7aziSeHrnCXhH5SifCCmAvb3hXkxJJ3F/GzC+Hq8a0OyruocJ/9zVuE7ALlAqfLObgKZTNGL1rA71WX+wENRAeUe065KwVoTaLFhzC/2ZKUewEqv/jRJsH7DiIfuwi/9bCRIixFWsYMf7fdXJbx9ihrjqzN/wZPj17RHMjPSVQAZo7GMctiOl/ieM/PWQP831txXULHgopoC1A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=FIkXvE6NXo2hKSfPglDONMiuTKhLvNs9/BOEQHVUlww=; b=tf6Wxk6PwijKk9IhX2x0C6aLdK/3IducPAnNqfEoVsOoMbtHcVhmiCuw+6rZVAI1opF+TYbGa6xvSeFi9eleI5lIp38Rd6K1tATkjglqh80HjWhzmQepHo+NLq5Uq25Lxo28U+bPgabnuix+n1K4G6xYQfIGmNFTNMmOyPDhu20= Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:190::17) by MN2PR11MB3789.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:f2::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.17; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:57:08 +0000 Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2814.018; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:57:08 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: Rob Sayre CC: "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , The IESG , "Martin Thomson" , Christopher Wood Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 Thread-Index: AdX20DXn6nk7ia9BTXi3bSvYC2yFiwAnJ+6AAAcSpnAAalMNAAAI3lvw Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:57:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: <03a88995-a64b-4214-a408-1e826f3ecc9a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [173.38.220.56] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ba9307f4-3f97-4463-c543-08d7c777f2bb x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3789: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 034119E4F6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(366004)(136003)(39860400002)(376002)(396003)(346002)(199004)(186003)(66556008)(8936002)(66446008)(6916009)(86362001)(53546011)(66476007)(6506007)(71200400001)(8676002)(81156014)(33656002)(2906002)(66946007)(55016002)(76116006)(81166006)(64756008)(7696005)(52536014)(54906003)(26005)(9686003)(5660300002)(316002)(66574012)(4326008)(9326002)(478600001)(966005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB3789; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: o8QxK/FTR37wJGRWNBcSjwL6QJg7/3v9gR3V4cnp9jZVnkJEWsi8UmG7xq6RZ/ibFubJrox2JCLV+yrTHxzopcSEnbVrmp9gjv6/XufeILRPbLUSBF983qkIxiPM1ccnWss51aHfTDtmmjVbei3J5R/u6rAYyBdsaP8udXkUX2zt4xCRv34kmcxWJzHvV9r+iY78RxplofQ/jlu8ftOeL7oVGJs4r74rkby/BijEuEL1x0/Jf8GnBOrQEcBQGPMaAnpSsHNxuPPymrUpgtpcMvKRe2SlxrR+AMZKXO4P5k251vMwtPE/lc3ZhY4ybVJWFIHtGoLX+FA2Vx3UbfxpZSFj3n2/n0tz6k/uF0x2F74B6r1mFBnjmP1pYgiAbmGlkhvgdTSu/bL69w2aEuaHLvixvQVLKLqrnXpKRoWdP/+Zixv9TfXw/KfI7JQ67RHmmrcwRCyYkwf3ImApN9BvO2g5OtVXQLTV0G7VusYYvKzxDqYMNzbdwR9ZPYbVi27Wi+GTEjn4nxngBcOxfb88cw== x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 4HUnd92MVVavXmH//pBB4nPTdi5lL1aKK+VexoAl++yw42kb9LxfMvkCGnUB8IqL9E3ztibgCM0Nf51282DVbRgoZa7AJKYIelaUFd5NTFOT6c1c83gwPTM3R0DnthncRWTu2n4BjUc8jEDmpJza2g== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MN2PR11MB4366B12A5C74EEC2AEB25C09B5FA0MN2PR11MB4366namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ba9307f4-3f97-4463-c543-08d7c777f2bb X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Mar 2020 17:57:08.0474 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: Bzqh+lAcAY3ByNRYmjh0uxZSqa65kak74NIqPC/RVEDFatf17UgNdwk5ynYFUmONzuJuwHc/j2qJW62/yCI6iw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3789 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.15, xch-aln-005.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-3.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 17:57:31 -0000 --_000_MN2PR11MB4366B12A5C74EEC2AEB25C09B5FA0MN2PR11MB4366namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgUm9iLA0KDQpGcm9tOiBJZXRmLWFuZC1naXRodWIgPGlldGYtYW5kLWdpdGh1Yi1ib3VuY2Vz QGlldGYub3JnPiBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgUm9iIFNheXJlDQpTZW50OiAxMyBNYXJjaCAyMDIwIDEy OjI1DQpUbzogUm9iIFdpbHRvbiAocndpbHRvbikgPHJ3aWx0b249NDBjaXNjby5jb21AZG1hcmMu aWV0Zi5vcmc+DQpDYzogZ2l0LWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsgaWV0Zi1hbmQtZ2l0aHViQGlldGYu b3JnOyBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWdpdC11c2luZy1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IFRoZSBJRVNHIDxpZXNn QGlldGYub3JnPjsgTWFydGluIFRob21zb24gPG10QGxvd2VudHJvcHkubmV0PjsgQ2hyaXN0b3Bo ZXIgV29vZCA8Y2F3QGhlYXBpbmdiaXRzLm5ldD4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbSWV0Zi1hbmQtZ2l0 aHViXSBSb2JXaWx0b24gcmV2aWV3IG9mIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtZ2l0LXVzaW5nLWdpdGh1Yi0wNQ0K DQpPbiBGcmksIE1hciAxMywgMjAyMCBhdCAxMDowMyBQTSBSb2IgV2lsdG9uIChyd2lsdG9uKSA8 cndpbHRvbj00MGNpc2NvLmNvbUBkbWFyYy5pZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86NDBjaXNjby5jb21AZG1h cmMuaWV0Zi5vcmc+PiB3cm90ZToNCg0KTXkgY29uY2VybiBpcyBsZXNzIGFib3V0IGxvc2luZyB0 aGUgZGF0YSAoc2luY2UgdGhhdCBpcyBiZWluZyBiYWNrZWQgdXApLCBidXQgbW9yZSBhYm91dCBs b3NpbmcgY29udHJvbCBvZiBhbiBhY2NvdW50L29yZ2FuaXphdGlvbiB0aGF0IGlzIHVuZGVyIHRo ZSBJRVRGJ3MgbmFtZS4gIEknbSBub3Qgc3VyZSB3aGF0IHBvbGljaWVzIEdpdGh1YiBoYXMgZm9y IHJlY292ZXJpbmcgYW4gYWNjb3VudC9vcmdhbmlzYXRpb24gdGhhdCBvbmUgbG9zZXMgY29udHJv bCBvdmVyLCBidXQgSSdtIHN1cmUgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgaGFzc2xlLCBhbmQgZW1iYXJyYXNzaW5n Lg0KDQpIb3cgaXMgdGhpcyBkaWZmZXJlbnQgZnJvbSBhbnkgb3RoZXIgc3lzdGVtIHRoZSBJRVRG IG1pZ2h0IHVzZT8NCltSV10NCg0KSeKAmW0gbm90IHRoYXQgZmFtaWxpYXIgd2l0aCBhbGwgdGhl IElFVEYgaW5mcmFzdHJ1Y3R1cmUgb3Igc2VydmljZXMgdGhhdCBhcmUgdXNlZDoNCg0KICAqICAg SWYgSUVURiBpcyBob3N0aW5nIHN0dWZmIGluIHRoZSBjbG91ZCwgdGhlbiBJIHdvdWxkIGltYWdp bmUgdGhhdCByZWxhdGl2ZWx5IGZldyBmb2xrcyBoYXZlIHRoZSBvd25lci9hZG1pbiBhdXRob3Jp emF0aW9ucyBhbmQgdGhleSBzaG91bGQgYWxyZWFkeSBrbm93IHRvIGxvb2sgYWZ0ZXIgdGhlbSBj YXJlZnVsbHkuDQogICogICBGb3Igc3R1ZmYgYmVpbmcgcGh5c2ljYWxseSBob3N0ZWQgYnkgSUVU RiB0aGVuIEkgcHJlc3VtZSB0aGF0IGFuIGFkbWluIGNvdWxkIGFsd2F5cyBkaXNjb25uZWN0IHRo ZW0gZnJvbSB0aGUgSW50ZXJuZXQsIHR1cm4gb2ZmIHRoZSBwb3dlciwgd2lwZSB0aGUgZGlzaywg ZXRjLg0KICAqICAgRm9yIG90aGVyIGFjY291bnRzLCBJIHN1c3BlY3QgbG9zaW5nIGNyZWRlbnRp YWxzIGlzIHByb2JhYmx5IGxlc3MgaW1wYWN0ZnVsLCBidXQgSSBkb27igJl0IGtub3cgd2hhdCB0 aGVzZSBzZXJ2aWNlcyBhcmUuDQoNCkluIHRoZSBnaXRodWIgY2FzZSwgdGhlcmUgYXJlIGEgZmV3 IGRpZmZlcmVuY2VzOg0KDQogICogICBUaGUgQURzIGFuZCAxNTArIFdHIGNoYWlycyBtYXkgYmUg bGVzcyBmYW1pbGlhciBhYm91dCBnaXRodWIgYW5kIHRoZSBzZWN1cml0eSBjb25zaWRlcmF0aW9u cyDigJMgdGhleSBtYXkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCBzZXR0aW5nIHVwIDJGQSBpc27igJl0IHdvcnRoIHRo ZSBoYXNzbGUuDQogICogICBPdmVyIHRpbWUgaXQgaXMgcGxhdXNpYmxlIHRoYXQgZ2l0aHViIG1h eSBob3N0IGxvdHMgb2YgSUVURiBkb2NzL2RyYWZ0cywgYW5kIGhlbmNlIHRob3NlIGRvY3VtZW50 cyBtYXkgdHVybiB1cCBtb3JlIGZyZXF1ZW50bHkgaW4gd2ViIHNlYXJjaGVzLiAgSWYgYSBwcm9t aW5lbnQgZHJhZnQgaXMgaW4gYW4gYWNjb3VudCB0aGF0IElFVEYgZG9lc27igJl0IGNvbnRyb2ws IHRoZW4gdGhhdCBkcmFmdCBjb3VsZCBiZSBtb2RpZmllZCBpbiB3YXlzIHRoYXQgY2F1c2UgcHJv YmxlbXMgYW5kIGNvbmZ1c2lvbi4NCiAgKiAgIEkgZG9u4oCZdCBrbm93IGhvdyBlYXN5IGl0IGlz IHRvIGdldCBiYWNrIGNvbnRyb2wgb2YgYSBnaXRodWIgYWNjb3VudCBvbmNlIHlvdSBoYXZlIGxv c3QgaXQuICBFLmcuIGZyb20gaHR0cHM6Ly9oZWxwLmdpdGh1Yi5jb20vZW4vZ2l0aHViL2F1dGhl bnRpY2F0aW5nLXRvLWdpdGh1Yi9yZWNvdmVyaW5nLXlvdXItYWNjb3VudC1pZi15b3UtbG9zZS15 b3VyLTJmYS1jcmVkZW50aWFsczoNCg0KDQoNCldhcm5pbmc6IEZvciBzZWN1cml0eSByZWFzb25z LCBHaXRIdWIgU3VwcG9ydCBtYXkgbm90IGJlIGFibGUgdG8gcmVzdG9yZSBhY2Nlc3MgdG8gYWNj b3VudHMgd2l0aCB0d28tZmFjdG9yIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uIGVuYWJsZWQgaWYgeW91IGxvc2Ug eW91ciB0d28tZmFjdG9yIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uIGNyZWRlbnRpYWxzIG9yIGxvc2UgYWNjZXNz IHRvIHlvdXIgYWNjb3VudCByZWNvdmVyeSBtZXRob2RzLg0KDQpUaGFua3MsDQpSb2INCg0KDQoN Cg0KdGhhbmtzLA0KUm9iDQoNCg== --_000_MN2PR11MB4366B12A5C74EEC2AEB25C09B5FA0MN2PR11MB4366namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRv ciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTUgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPHN0eWxl PjwhLS0NCi8qIEZvbnQgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 V2luZ2RpbmdzOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjUgMCAwIDAgMCAwIDAgMCAwIDA7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0K CXtmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FtYnJpYSBNYXRoIjsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDQgNSAzIDUgNCA2IDMg MiA0O30NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDE1 IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5Oi1hcHBsZS1zeXN0 ZW07fQ0KLyogU3R5bGUgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCnAuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBsaS5Nc29Ob3JtYWws IGRpdi5Nc29Ob3JtYWwNCgl7bWFyZ2luOjBjbTsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOi4wMDAxcHQ7DQoJ Zm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjt9DQph OmxpbmssIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlwZXJsaW5rDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgljb2xv cjpibHVlOw0KCXRleHQtZGVjb3JhdGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0KYTp2aXNpdGVkLCBzcGFuLk1z b0h5cGVybGlua0ZvbGxvd2VkDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgljb2xvcjpwdXJw bGU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9uOnVuZGVybGluZTt9DQpwLk1zb0xpc3RQYXJhZ3JhcGgsIGxp Lk1zb0xpc3RQYXJhZ3JhcGgsIGRpdi5Nc29MaXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlv cml0eTozNDsNCgltYXJnaW4tdG9wOjBjbTsNCgltYXJnaW4tcmlnaHQ6MGNtOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1i b3R0b206MGNtOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjM2LjBwdDsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOi4wMDAxcHQ7 DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjt9 DQpwLm1zb25vcm1hbDAsIGxpLm1zb25vcm1hbDAsIGRpdi5tc29ub3JtYWwwDQoJe21zby1zdHls ZS1uYW1lOm1zb25vcm1hbDsNCgltc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bzsNCgltYXJnaW4tcmln aHQ6MGNtOw0KCW1zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjBjbTsN Cglmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmO30N CnNwYW4uRW1haWxTdHlsZTE4DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOnBlcnNvbmFsLXJlcGx5Ow0KCWZv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmOw0KCWNvbG9yOndpbmRvd3RleHQ7fQ0KLk1z b0NocERlZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9ubHk7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7DQoJbXNvLWZhcmVhc3QtbGFuZ3VhZ2U6RU4tVVM7fQ0KQHBh Z2UgV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xDQoJe3NpemU6NjEyLjBwdCA3OTIuMHB0Ow0KCW1hcmdpbjo3Mi4wcHQg NzIuMHB0IDcyLjBwdCA3Mi4wcHQ7fQ0KZGl2LldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtwYWdlOldvcmRTZWN0 aW9uMTt9DQovKiBMaXN0IERlZmluaXRpb25zICovDQpAbGlzdCBsMA0KCXttc28tbGlzdC1pZDo0 ODQ3ODM4MzE7DQoJbXNvLWxpc3QtdHlwZTpoeWJyaWQ7DQoJbXNvLWxpc3QtdGVtcGxhdGUtaWRz Ojc0NjQ3ODM4MCAxNTIyNTk3NTUyIDEzNDgwNzU1NSAxMzQ4MDc1NTcgMTM0ODA3NTUzIDEzNDgw NzU1NSAxMzQ4MDc1NTcgMTM0ODA3NTUzIDEzNDgwNzU1NSAxMzQ4MDc1NTc7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6 bGV2ZWwxDQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1zdGFydC1hdDo1Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0 OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDotOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0K CW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgltYXJnaW4tbGVmdDoyMC41cHQ7DQoJ dGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LTE4LjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsN Cgltc28tZmFyZWFzdC1mb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsMg0KCXtt c28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6bzsNCgltc28t bGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJ bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6NTYuNXB0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0xOC4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 IkNvdXJpZXIgTmV3Ijt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDMNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3Jt YXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Ou+CpzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9u ZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJbWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6OTIuNXB0 Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0xOC4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzO30NCkBsaXN0 IGwwOmxldmVsNA0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVs LXRleHQ674K3Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXIt cG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgltYXJnaW4tbGVmdDoxMjguNXB0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0xOC4w cHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6U3ltYm9sO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNQ0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwt bnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6bzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFi LXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJbWFyZ2luLWxl ZnQ6MTY0LjVwdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotMTguMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDb3VyaWVy IE5ldyI7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw2DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxl dDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrvgqc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNv LWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCW1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjIwMC41cHQ7DQoJdGV4 dC1pbmRlbnQ6LTE4LjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2 ZWw3DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrv grc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlv bjpsZWZ0Ow0KCW1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjIzNi41cHQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LTE4LjBwdDsNCglm b250LWZhbWlseTpTeW1ib2w7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw4DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXIt Zm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDpvOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpu b25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgltYXJnaW4tbGVmdDoyNzIu NXB0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0xOC4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNvdXJpZXIgTmV3Ijt9 DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDkNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1z by1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Ou+CpzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwt bnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJbWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6MzA4LjVwdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVu dDotMTguMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OldpbmdkaW5nczt9DQpvbA0KCXttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t OjBjbTt9DQp1bA0KCXttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjBjbTt9DQotLT48L3N0eWxlPjwhLS1baWYgZ3Rl IG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVkZWZhdWx0cyB2OmV4dD0iZWRpdCIgc3BpZG1heD0iMTAy NiIgLz4NCjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hh cGVsYXlvdXQgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiPg0KPG86aWRtYXAgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiIGRhdGE9IjEiIC8+ DQo8L286c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQ+PC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+DQo8L2hlYWQ+DQo8Ym9keSBsYW5n PSJFTi1HQiIgbGluaz0iYmx1ZSIgdmxpbms9InB1cnBsZSI+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSJXb3JkU2Vj dGlvbjEiPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9Im1zby1mYXJlYXN0LWxh bmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTIj5IaSBSb2IsPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9Im1zby1mYXJlYXN0LWxhbmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTIj48bzpwPiZu YnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItbGVm dDpzb2xpZCBibHVlIDEuNXB0O3BhZGRpbmc6MGNtIDBjbSAwY20gNC4wcHQiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxk aXYgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci10b3A6c29saWQgI0UxRTFFMSAxLjBwdDtwYWRk aW5nOjMuMHB0IDBjbSAwY20gMGNtIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxzcGFuIGxh bmc9IkVOLVVTIj5Gcm9tOjwvc3Bhbj48L2I+PHNwYW4gbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiPiBJZXRmLWFuZC1n aXRodWIgJmx0O2lldGYtYW5kLWdpdGh1Yi1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnJmd0Ow0KPGI+T24gQmVo YWxmIE9mIDwvYj5Sb2IgU2F5cmU8YnI+DQo8Yj5TZW50OjwvYj4gMTMgTWFyY2ggMjAyMCAxMjoy NTxicj4NCjxiPlRvOjwvYj4gUm9iIFdpbHRvbiAocndpbHRvbikgJmx0O3J3aWx0b249NDBjaXNj by5jb21AZG1hcmMuaWV0Zi5vcmcmZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPGI+Q2M6PC9iPiBnaXQtY2hhaXJzQGlldGYu b3JnOyBpZXRmLWFuZC1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtZ2l0LXVzaW5nLWdpdGh1 YkBpZXRmLm9yZzsgVGhlIElFU0cgJmx0O2llc2dAaWV0Zi5vcmcmZ3Q7OyBNYXJ0aW4gVGhvbXNv biAmbHQ7bXRAbG93ZW50cm9weS5uZXQmZ3Q7OyBDaHJpc3RvcGhlciBXb29kICZsdDtjYXdAaGVh cGluZ2JpdHMubmV0Jmd0Ozxicj4NCjxiPlN1YmplY3Q6PC9iPiBSZTogW0lldGYtYW5kLWdpdGh1 Yl0gUm9iV2lsdG9uIHJldmlldyBvZiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWdpdC11c2luZy1naXRodWItMDU8bzpw PjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+ PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwi Pk9uIEZyaSwgTWFyIDEzLCAyMDIwIGF0IDEwOjAzIFBNIFJvYiBXaWx0b24gKHJ3aWx0b24pICZs dDtyd2lsdG9uPTxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzo0MGNpc2NvLmNvbUBkbWFyYy5pZXRmLm9yZyI+NDBj aXNjby5jb21AZG1hcmMuaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+Jmd0OyB3cm90ZTo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwv ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItbGVmdDpz b2xpZCAjQ0NDQ0NDIDEuMHB0O3BhZGRpbmc6MGNtIDBjbSAwY20gNi4wcHQ7bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6 NC44cHQ7bWFyZ2luLXJpZ2h0OjBjbSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48YnI+DQpNeSBj b25jZXJuIGlzIGxlc3MgYWJvdXQgbG9zaW5nIHRoZSBkYXRhIChzaW5jZSB0aGF0IGlzIGJlaW5n IGJhY2tlZCB1cCksIGJ1dCBtb3JlIGFib3V0IGxvc2luZyBjb250cm9sIG9mIGFuIGFjY291bnQv b3JnYW5pemF0aW9uIHRoYXQgaXMgdW5kZXIgdGhlIElFVEYncyBuYW1lLiZuYnNwOyBJJ20gbm90 IHN1cmUgd2hhdCBwb2xpY2llcyBHaXRodWIgaGFzIGZvciByZWNvdmVyaW5nIGFuIGFjY291bnQv b3JnYW5pc2F0aW9uIHRoYXQgb25lIGxvc2VzIGNvbnRyb2wNCiBvdmVyLCBidXQgSSdtIHN1cmUg aXQgd291bGQgYmUgaGFzc2xlLCBhbmQgZW1iYXJyYXNzaW5nLiA8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwv YmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpw PjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPkhvdyBpcyB0aGlzIGRp ZmZlcmVudCBmcm9tIGFueSBvdGhlciBzeXN0ZW0gdGhlIElFVEYgbWlnaHQgdXNlPzxvOnA+PC9v OnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGI+PGk+W1JXXSA8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvaT48 L2I+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGI+PGk+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L2k+ PC9iPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxpPknigJltIG5vdCB0aGF0IGZhbWls aWFyIHdpdGggYWxsIHRoZSBJRVRGIGluZnJhc3RydWN0dXJlIG9yIHNlcnZpY2VzIHRoYXQgYXJl IHVzZWQ6PG86cD48L286cD48L2k+PC9iPjwvcD4NCjx1bCBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luLXRvcDowY20i IHR5cGU9ImRpc2MiPg0KPGxpIGNsYXNzPSJNc29MaXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2lu LWxlZnQ6LTE1LjVwdDttc28tbGlzdDpsMCBsZXZlbDEgbGZvMSI+DQo8Yj48aT5JZiBJRVRGIGlz IGhvc3Rpbmcgc3R1ZmYgaW4gdGhlIGNsb3VkLCB0aGVuIEkgd291bGQgaW1hZ2luZSB0aGF0IHJl bGF0aXZlbHkgZmV3IGZvbGtzIGhhdmUgdGhlIG93bmVyL2FkbWluIGF1dGhvcml6YXRpb25zIGFu ZCB0aGV5IHNob3VsZCBhbHJlYWR5IGtub3cgdG8gbG9vayBhZnRlciB0aGVtIGNhcmVmdWxseS48 bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvaT48L2I+PC9saT48bGkgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb0xpc3RQYXJhZ3JhcGgiIHN0eWxl PSJtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDotMTUuNXB0O21zby1saXN0OmwwIGxldmVsMSBsZm8xIj4NCjxiPjxpPkZv ciBzdHVmZiBiZWluZyBwaHlzaWNhbGx5IGhvc3RlZCBieSBJRVRGIHRoZW4gSSBwcmVzdW1lIHRo YXQgYW4gYWRtaW4gY291bGQgYWx3YXlzIGRpc2Nvbm5lY3QgdGhlbSBmcm9tIHRoZSBJbnRlcm5l dCwgdHVybiBvZmYgdGhlIHBvd2VyLCB3aXBlIHRoZSBkaXNrLCBldGMuPG86cD48L286cD48L2k+ PC9iPjwvbGk+PGxpIGNsYXNzPSJNc29MaXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6 LTE1LjVwdDttc28tbGlzdDpsMCBsZXZlbDEgbGZvMSI+DQo8Yj48aT5Gb3Igb3RoZXIgYWNjb3Vu dHMsIEkgc3VzcGVjdCBsb3NpbmcgY3JlZGVudGlhbHMgaXMgcHJvYmFibHkgbGVzcyBpbXBhY3Rm dWwsIGJ1dCBJIGRvbuKAmXQga25vdyB3aGF0IHRoZXNlIHNlcnZpY2VzIGFyZS48bzpwPjwvbzpw PjwvaT48L2I+PC9saT48L3VsPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGI+PGk+PG86cD4mbmJz cDs8L286cD48L2k+PC9iPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxpPkluIHRoZSBn aXRodWIgY2FzZSwgdGhlcmUgYXJlIGEgZmV3IGRpZmZlcmVuY2VzOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9pPjwv Yj48L3A+DQo8dWwgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi10b3A6MGNtIiB0eXBlPSJkaXNjIj4NCjxsaSBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0Oi0xNS41cHQ7bXNvLWxpc3Q6 bDAgbGV2ZWwxIGxmbzEiPg0KPGI+PGk+VGhlIEFEcyBhbmQgMTUwJiM0MzsgV0cgY2hhaXJzIG1h eSBiZSBsZXNzIGZhbWlsaWFyIGFib3V0IGdpdGh1YiBhbmQgdGhlIHNlY3VyaXR5IGNvbnNpZGVy YXRpb25zIOKAkyB0aGV5IG1heSB0aGluayB0aGF0IHNldHRpbmcgdXAgMkZBIGlzbuKAmXQgd29y dGggdGhlIGhhc3NsZS48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvaT48L2I+PC9saT48bGkgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb0xpc3RQ YXJhZ3JhcGgiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDotMTUuNXB0O21zby1saXN0OmwwIGxldmVsMSBs Zm8xIj4NCjxiPjxpPk92ZXIgdGltZSBpdCBpcyBwbGF1c2libGUgdGhhdCBnaXRodWIgbWF5IGhv c3QgbG90cyBvZiBJRVRGIGRvY3MvZHJhZnRzLCBhbmQgaGVuY2UgdGhvc2UgZG9jdW1lbnRzIG1h eSB0dXJuIHVwIG1vcmUgZnJlcXVlbnRseSBpbiB3ZWIgc2VhcmNoZXMuJm5ic3A7IElmIGEgcHJv bWluZW50IGRyYWZ0IGlzIGluIGFuIGFjY291bnQgdGhhdCBJRVRGIGRvZXNu4oCZdCBjb250cm9s LCB0aGVuIHRoYXQgZHJhZnQgY291bGQgYmUgbW9kaWZpZWQgaW4gd2F5cw0KIHRoYXQgY2F1c2Ug cHJvYmxlbXMgYW5kIGNvbmZ1c2lvbi48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvaT48L2I+PC9saT48bGkgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb0xpc3RQYXJhZ3JhcGgiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDotMTUuNXB0O21zby1saXN0Omww IGxldmVsMSBsZm8xIj4NCjxiPjxpPkkgZG9u4oCZdCBrbm93IGhvdyBlYXN5IGl0IGlzIHRvIGdl dCBiYWNrIGNvbnRyb2wgb2YgYSBnaXRodWIgYWNjb3VudCBvbmNlIHlvdSBoYXZlIGxvc3QgaXQu Jm5ic3A7IEUuZy4gZnJvbQ0KPC9pPjwvYj48YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL2hlbHAuZ2l0aHViLmNv bS9lbi9naXRodWIvYXV0aGVudGljYXRpbmctdG8tZ2l0aHViL3JlY292ZXJpbmcteW91ci1hY2Nv dW50LWlmLXlvdS1sb3NlLXlvdXItMmZhLWNyZWRlbnRpYWxzIj5odHRwczovL2hlbHAuZ2l0aHVi LmNvbS9lbi9naXRodWIvYXV0aGVudGljYXRpbmctdG8tZ2l0aHViL3JlY292ZXJpbmcteW91ci1h Y2NvdW50LWlmLXlvdS1sb3NlLXlvdXItMmZhLWNyZWRlbnRpYWxzPC9hPjo8Yj48aT48bzpwPjwv bzpwPjwvaT48L2I+PC9saT48L3VsPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb0xpc3RQYXJhZ3JhcGgiIHN0eWxl PSJtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDoyMC41cHQiPjxiPjxpPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9pPjwvYj48L3A+ DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjI2LjBwdCI+ PHN0cm9uZz48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjVwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTotYXBwbGUt c3lzdGVtO2NvbG9yOiMyNDI5MkU7YmFja2dyb3VuZDojRkZEQ0UwIj5XYXJuaW5nPC9zcGFuPjwv c3Ryb25nPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuNXB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5Oi1hcHBsZS1z eXN0ZW07Y29sb3I6IzI0MjkyRTtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOiNGRkRDRTAiPjoNCiBGb3Igc2VjdXJpdHkg cmVhc29ucywgR2l0SHViIFN1cHBvcnQgbWF5IG5vdCBiZSBhYmxlIHRvIHJlc3RvcmUgYWNjZXNz IHRvIGFjY291bnRzIHdpdGggdHdvLWZhY3RvciBhdXRoZW50aWNhdGlvbiBlbmFibGVkIGlmIHlv dSBsb3NlIHlvdXIgdHdvLWZhY3RvciBhdXRoZW50aWNhdGlvbiBjcmVkZW50aWFscyBvciBsb3Nl IGFjY2VzcyB0byB5b3VyIGFjY291bnQgcmVjb3ZlcnkgbWV0aG9kcy48L3NwYW4+PGI+PGk+PG86 cD48L286cD48L2k+PC9iPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxpPjxvOnA+Jm5i c3A7PC9vOnA+PC9pPjwvYj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48Yj48aT5UaGFua3Ms PG86cD48L286cD48L2k+PC9iPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxpPlJvYjxv OnA+PC9vOnA+PC9pPjwvYj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48Yj48aT48bzpwPiZu YnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvaT48L2I+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGI+PGk+PG86cD4m bmJzcDs8L286cD48L2k+PC9iPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7 PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PG86cD4mbmJz cDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj50aGFua3Ms PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5Sb2Im bmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwi PiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_MN2PR11MB4366B12A5C74EEC2AEB25C09B5FA0MN2PR11MB4366namp_-- From nobody Fri Mar 13 12:20:34 2020 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 BB2A43A0A81; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:20:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 2pbMuBOuSvSf; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:20:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg1-x52a.google.com (mail-pg1-x52a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52a]) (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 EC37A3A0A64; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:20:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id b1so5525357pgm.8; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:20:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=35jFym2CbRn24MoKImSccLNMKA9Bfxkm5ft+LTTNvTM=; b=r+t+NSZ9xyNVRQvDFyNbp0R9cA5IeVtxdo6TWEP6GAI8XBG3ZjdcemtjpX3sPk2Q/F J5fEykDqX/lbYvEMf14+2ZO6zfV5J4SQlPdLGEVfe9qGDn+IjnsxwNOeLyNnpTl7QRWf WxpilkW35OMK95IDAO0IlTnXk8ErUiEmLiPl4uCTTKYx3+yNtXlQu6NNh3VCxVkgV7Ao 2FDZUAmlr9FfnHcfHA5wrlda8NwENw/lyKknWNB4LVYyErkP/jvl+ruI3Tu9VAGEuGGD 2vDlknSiA32/GTDwdYeN/8LvkP+95+7pzklqpXlCzGeq9wHPff+G7JJLAKmO9oxKvwL4 Q+gQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=35jFym2CbRn24MoKImSccLNMKA9Bfxkm5ft+LTTNvTM=; b=cq1j76VFpBaiSt7BcQpH70YAgx64V+HHhuTqlogvnVB5RBK8GGxbDEq7lditZfyjO6 mJImzOSI5cu8XTXHStAMEZ5hEMfnwCKF7ATMcjkTkoACHCtiPtWFsjpVqq8o5NB2IFD1 h+Xh6CXd/0YuSzyMRiY+V1tMBY+GVLmcBh+pv4nVPR7rNWNgsMRhuPwKdH1pT4towrwd op9TaLOp6kPwzPMYKCococPNxeEfd1HJstNTNgM9BDsYrwa3GK8ijhKQ4tC6fRxN90Zm MrknhhCWW5SOJqHVfX/D/hZA07Q0Afnt5DWbpnn7zM6SKTu5Z1eU+LMW4YKyoIZwxXIj dppg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2ucPsex5P/z/XzTue1a8GLqhyK1JVCAaLog8sGoGeqxfcx8HBm LlbFtlcr2XgI1qhIRTw1tVrG7mQC X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsyuyVOssGbQwaH7DRwNo1EVENCed54vYDhr5qPMLbT8dk0YCJz7fYrJVnPeEmO9A4xliHHkw== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:98c9:: with SMTP id e9mr14989194pfm.204.1584127227367; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:20:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.25.143]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e3sm26131005pgm.15.2020.03.13.12.20.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 12:20:19 -0700 (PDT) To: Christopher Wood , ietf-and-github@ietf.org Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" References: <07e5360a-5b55-4346-b2b4-382b9242e383@www.fastmail.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 08:20:15 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <07e5360a-5b55-4346-b2b4-382b9242e383@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Propose changing draft-ietf-git-using-github from BCP to Informational X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 19:20:33 -0000 Hi, I disagree that it is a minor or inconsequential change. It means that it is no longer a set of rules that a WG must follow if they choose to use GitHub. It just becomes some non-binding suggestions. This has conseqences for the text, starting with the Abstract: > This document describes best practices ... needs to be something like This document describes suggested guidelines ... Then delete section 1.5 and lower-case all the RFC2119 keywords, to avoid confusion. More seriously, we would lose the normative value of this: > In addition to Working Group policies, notices on repositories MUST > include citations for the IETF Note Well (https://www.ietf.org/about/ > note-well/). which really should be mandatory. Also this: > All repositories for Working Group documents within the Working Group > organization MUST be public. I haven't re-read the whole draft. There may be other things as well that are also important and not necessarily implied by RFC2418 already. So I do not agree to the change of proposed status. Regards Brian Carpenter On 14-Mar-20 02:48, Christopher Wood wrote: > During last call, some folks suggested draft-ietf-git-using-github is better suited as an Informational rather than BCP document. This seems like a minor and inconsequential change, though I'd like to hear from the WG to understand if folks object. To that end, if you disagree with this change, can you please let us know why? > > Thanks! > Chris > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > From nobody Fri Mar 13 14:09:46 2020 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 2B8DB3A1012; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:09:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=mnot.net header.b=oGFhNzhV; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=a3G760mG 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 gG-KK2XzZEmJ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 494533A100E; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E57B22411; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:09:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:09:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject :date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; s=fm2; bh=2Pxr0RF NJ62Wwrba5h1jTCpV8nVl/cz+esTjg8tklS8=; b=oGFhNzhVQmisKg0ErFfsJPW LGpUxofelmf18wKjhx49/K3Z2K3J/Aq2qIsbk2EA/fE6guf0UoZa/GkaKn4bJMgk 7lR1HX9wX3KNPTHqiK7OAQvHaaU30Mm7AATPoXXfbsImJZYeWr5oXeDfElZL7V0z nmnHv9PnN2QOmAMH1k+uFUgpnTqt8bofHf2tICpDy+PO9Rct+xb/YMSlZLE8Dc2I 9JscyLnB6HYxVwI1fI0+tJHh93Opw2INGk3VbI8EYwn2znPpqbXu5VyCzl2f2ltl 81sclkrHrBHQOLNDqwJZpXXXZXY4gWaEIeqbQUa207o+Q+ulKJ0C1cGrhCt/BAQ= = DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=2Pxr0RFNJ62Wwrba5h1jTCpV8nVl/cz+esTjg8tkl S8=; b=a3G760mGXRQ6SCSPkcRsj11yVSMeWI+s53CQNZsc1fQoYFuGpJyp+5LJR 38+oqIFVnhOzphhaw1nBf0kUJGBlx0oJxEeOXqPHUmu+bMcno7z9cC7aXxLSWSBP n2gZxDmGePdcnc67Uvh9aPT5ofpv/MU4OaWlhLDCFDFHgh3Vkhyj+007HWPAfFhF ZS5g8Ijx1d5qW10yhvGrJhYvPPsRn3LUzagGjgwoQHP+yEckDPFZlivgAnzT3HHD U+HS9SMMIfkeDy/iVIcFMdAFZtmBNL3QMk4m4l2JEXxC+uodTaOJd6183qIsxU6J EHa/wsoX/Vcvr2VuB3h6RSBs86C5A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddvjedgudeghecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpegtgffhggfufffkfhgjvffosehtqhhmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeforghr khcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrih hnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepuddrudegfedrheekrddvgeejnecuvehluhhsthgv rhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnh gvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from [IPv6:2001:8004:cc3:43ce:912b:4894:eab2:df72] (unknown [1.143.58.247]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1FE4B306130A; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:09:40 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Mark Nottingham Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 08:09:36 +1100 Message-Id: <5645321C-A644-4A93-B43F-D23F680DDD7A@mnot.net> References: Cc: Christopher Wood , ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: To: Brian E Carpenter X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17D50) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Propose changing draft-ietf-git-using-github from BCP to Informational X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Mar 2020 21:09:45 -0000 Sent from my iPhone > On 14 Mar 2020, at 6:20 am, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFHi, >=20 > I disagree that it is a minor or inconsequential change. It means that it i= s no longer a set of rules that a WG must follow if they choose to use GitHu= b. It just becomes some non-binding suggestions. That is what this group is chartered to produce.=20 >=20 > This has conseqences for the text, starting with the Abstract: >=20 >> This document describes best practices ... >=20 > needs to be something like >=20 > This document describes suggested guidelines ... >=20 > Then delete section 1.5 and lower-case all the RFC2119 keywords, to avoid c= onfusion. That=E2=80=99s already started; see the editors=E2=80=99 copy.=20 > More seriously, we would lose the normative value of this: >=20 >> In addition to Working Group policies, notices on repositories MUST >> include citations for the IETF Note Well (https://www.ietf.org/about/ >> note-well/). >=20 > which really should be mandatory. Also this: >=20 >> All repositories for Working Group documents within the Working Group >> organization MUST be public. =20 >=20 > I haven't re-read the whole draft. There may be other things as well that a= re also important and not necessarily implied by RFC2418 already. So I do no= t agree to the change of proposed status. >=20 > Regards > Brian Carpenter >=20 >> On 14-Mar-20 02:48, Christopher Wood wrote: >> During last call, some folks suggested draft-ietf-git-using-github is bet= ter suited as an Informational rather than BCP document. This seems like a m= inor and inconsequential change, though I'd like to hear from the WG to unde= rstand if folks object. To that end, if you disagree with this change, can y= ou please let us know why? >>=20 >> Thanks! >> Chris >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Sun Mar 15 17:39:14 2020 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 924803A1EFA; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 17:39:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=LeC7IhHe; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=gG2N60jc 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 UGoyhNGRhr-g; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 17:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 388383A1EF8; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 17:38:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54ECE21A7B; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 20:38:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 15 Mar 2020 20:38:56 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=MjAe8qi2ED3lOOpejUFu5tN5GPbE FqIP71mCdlYdHn4=; b=LeC7IhHeIXm7wvFtuxTiuRbb7SpBjHsMFIjVRNwXBtRi 9uC7sqX5ayNwwBgysl4O6FF20ixkMna0f0TjLSAJYBuqomyvyzpNlBBfcFVQZ/3M WHeqn6Exo4K/1x8+bGPWmYVs+yjEVtwaOIHlth4mZWa6LcQGjnWhe77dZ3H6qOJ7 mwVbKdF84ncQXUPd1Sl4Ugrz2hQtFojjUhIVMnteX2eb6JoEMEJj2eR7g4I2izd+ UdALmWeNxXr22I38U30hWGNxMz7AEVQSmrWervPSc2AxHO/MuExeyOpXh3laXBwG f1CiezRemHqKKDOpJ+56XGMPUAxKjxesreT6li/x9g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=MjAe8q i2ED3lOOpejUFu5tN5GPbEFqIP71mCdlYdHn4=; b=gG2N60jcJt4Q0R7PmGISUz DECLgLGObGSXoAZz+bkfNYBvYsyevsqqiXNXBt7tksQ1mVaLGFHgp4BW993886yU tAyw82+vJblz3QDJv9kaE0NaV4VCAlL3o+E8S8FWoOJM9rwX+1Bt5t+qq49NgIbA 8EouLtSCct7XyN/LcebtMFuL9+7LIZWyL2s3OzI7bsqT7zl+VfNO0AC+FnOkrqfY ZZfyvw9dHgVb/zTWpX2thy+dQnHyN/hcDh1xJXCq5W49iaTDtCBko9/8IOMauUVM uDYIpAst06j4UIgUGZ4E1HlulpQYgAd/lxeRqoPWhscRjNLrNh7uwELgBW0JA2Pw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefuddgleegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id EB40AE00B8; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 20:38:55 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4bb03592-21be-51a2-28e7-14f23969fbb4@nokia.com> References: <158401082788.18076.104688218811852864@ietfa.amsl.com> <9322ba71-dd46-4c8c-aca5-78928c631e19@www.fastmail.com> <4bb03592-21be-51a2-28e7-14f23969fbb4@nokia.com> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:38:36 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Martin Vigoureux" , "The IESG" Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Martin_Vigoureux=27s_No_Objection_on?= =?utf-8?q?_draft-ietf-git-using-github-05=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 16 Mar 2020 00:39:05 -0000 On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 23:32, Martin Vigoureux wrote: > Ideally I would have also liked s/Each Working Group/The Working Group/ > but I agree with you that the new sentence does the job of setting the > context in which to read the document. My bad. I missed that with so much stuff going on. https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/54 does this. I might have to tweak that again based on the results of merging other changes, but I hope that this helps. From nobody Sun Mar 15 21:03:00 2020 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 99EFA3A097C for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 21:02:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=rfwifp4a; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=i0pXLmmo 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 VlCheu7od_1n for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 21:02:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C1833A0977 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 21:02:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26789680 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:02:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:02:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:date:from:to:subject:content-type; s= fm1; bh=Xs0X3VcFvjNA0fgQUXWB+REDMTxlHdiYnD3oIKAs6m4=; b=rfwifp4a E/rqFfQTeIlIgFJ35v31aDFtMIuYzYuUkkOUNjXzycfkardGGuxWZybre9zMc+J4 JT06nwk7rupIUi24zGAs92sTLTKFNOLc+NIW/qikypjvOsk66YA0FnmzZZyK8TRW ZOw6HfOrN6JBwxjgS/jtZWzJvPo3MsSvQk/PARRnjg64BemK5UwLGJfweKYgmvTj xjOjDPta/Wc8fvRqFdsv6EoBLWbTP1gntpznPDVNF0thcF1+CqzfSg1pLU0eVJDV IIZSmtEPANzGomu+sfLiq1ugIHmgMf50qkebHRNhhES0XcHd8Hc/zKIADQ0SCoXh 8GLCS/N9fOlLaQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Xs0X3VcFvjNA0fgQUXWB+REDMTxlH diYnD3oIKAs6m4=; b=i0pXLmmouvt+icsxwYjAdYqH+yicH9Y28Hmz+sucHO3Zl EWdh38a44qbwJAlTnavUfL0z4k/WEldJDjOIX3MxTYbD79W0sCyDua/4hIX9uA5W Zc2tiO+Fe+qQ2/iLWSOKqUAhyhXa+DmQkZnFSFZJaJOqfxojTtHv609JfF8j3Ofz 3iIyYVlAMHWN87aBPoguZrgE2WHMTL+1CngjDz1VZ2d5CE4NRXXkyDN29eKKvN3Z YdMoqp0CmuWWTAuro9+STNE8Ls87DtcfD22ggMMi7k/FQEg8b7JJN+id+L209CYp bS1/YovKHo4EkKL8+/0mrC/RGkKOllU6vjLPreQyA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefuddgudefjecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfggfkfffhvffutgesthdtre dtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpe hmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 53633E00B8; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:02:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 15:02:32 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 16 Mar 2020 04:02:57 -0000 In discussion with Rob Wilton, the question about recommendations for organization ownership was raised. The using-github draft says: > The owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area Directors. The -configuration drafts says: > Initialize the organization by designating the IETF Secretariat and the area directors in the working group's area as owners. If the responsible AD for the working group is from another area, that AD will be an owner as well. On face value, this is different, but it is at least consistent. The strictures in the policy are narrower in terms of requirements than the concrete implementation of that policy. I'm reading Rob's concern to be primarily about redundancy. An AD who becomes unreachable might render the organization inaccessible or unusable. Do you think that we should recommend or require inclusion of more people in the using-github draft to match the configuration draft? From nobody Sun Mar 15 21:12:57 2020 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 596753A09C4; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 21:12:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=b4Pa0Hz0; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=WmRsZ9fu 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 5x4Gv9vqTKke; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 21:12:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A90F03A09BC; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 21:12:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F543528; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:12:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:12:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=NOUieCxBhWK5mjVW6FDnUSmAqglc J2psxIfGxEolgBg=; b=b4Pa0Hz0jsAcBQvOrwibLJxlOVUBcQUpuPkc7xMXpVi4 wUbZCAU+21mgJ9uS029pWhyhGvd061VODqUeKoAmIiqbdemmom/s2F2loqJ8QI9B IW7n47fYYSW4vkIrh8xWmoix0+SaiinSClC5qa4ELJf5pCCoh8HRC2rz+yQKxFyH M3A4lprFopaOaE3aATjnlT3x7hP11vYAsu2D+y3n6UmqCYtU5zUwuedODLKAZx/l 5iA/SgId/VjWwtdUiHX+3xTs7QCr1ngDAlkj1KKpBmqS1CHHBmW7rR+Ch3fPshC2 aD1LMjoleIURhs9uX6qd5Z29dGeWZGZacg9L90Wtbw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=NOUieC xBhWK5mjVW6FDnUSmAqglcJ2psxIfGxEolgBg=; b=WmRsZ9fuPF8CbCBOExhJkP X9UQkwKawzZqdslwhpWipsVgY7TKnw6IiS17beVTDSXlhbhEuMNLwBNlzWP3uc1I +tTA+JbykweAyssOEgu0A+FArLKv1E2ZX5/Qy7v0DAz7+xXqV2g4NNrMRF9gmwDk Br1/qHnm8BaCHxyuDOeIPNjCckIDjnMofgq1Qovc1XOfUW3uWBj8jrE5dyeG/GCE 1TAUPqQXtkjl5dwaGCjjEvYqes0TVDHYzhDMA4XnUaaP3ud0JRg3gI3cyMn6z+6t m0NntdPAYURvWLovluL152r23+A8a9wjCVwYMrZedcwRxBAKqnyGyKNwK6oAUkRA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefuddgudeflecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhsohhphhhoshdrtghomhdpshhtrggtkhgv gigthhgrnhhgvgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmh grihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 9CC60E00B8; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:12:45 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <03a88995-a64b-4214-a408-1e826f3ecc9a@www.fastmail.com> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 15:12:26 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "The IESG" , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , "Christopher Wood" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 16 Mar 2020 04:12:50 -0000 On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 23:03, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > I personally think that having a > > backup is sensible. At the same time, having a single account with access > > to many repositories is a bit scary. > [RW] > Hum yes, maybe having the Secretariat on all WGs is not a good choice. > Perhaps we should say that all ADs for the area should be owners rather > than just the responsible AD, and there must always be a minimum of 2 > owners? So, for the general area perhaps it would be the AD and the > Secretariat? > > Obviously this would need to be aligned with the config draft. I will raise the question with the WG, as it is not limited to this draft. The -configuration draft has a broader net that includes the responsible AD, the ADs for the area, and the secretariat. > [RW] > My concern is less about losing the data (since that is being backed > up), but more about losing control of an account/organization that is > under the IETF's name. I'm not sure what policies Github has for > recovering an account/organisation that one loses control over, but I'm > sure it would be hassle, and embarrassing. I'm sure that the process is torturous. I tagged some text on to other changes I'm making. See https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/52/commits/302feb524c457f10a3fea21dcee140bd5dc6218e > FWIW: It is this sort of article that I am concerned about: > https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2019/03/25/thousands-of-coders-are-leaving-their-crown-jewels-exposed-on-github/ > > Some of the contributors to IETF will be quite new to git/github etc, > so really it is about warning them about stuff they should be careful > to avoid. Even a sentence or two in the security considerations might > help. I think that this is a question of scope. Personally, I think that's going a little outside the remit of the draft. And I'd rather attack this particular problem with tools. > FWIW, it is this sort of issue that I am concerned about: > https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/44010/is-ipv10-a-joke-or-a-serious-rfc-draft Ah, that old problem. :/ I don't think that we can help with that, other than avoiding paving the path to having something look official. We've talked about having tools like xml2rfc produce different styling for individual drafts than is used for presenting "official" content on IETF-controlled servers. That might help, though things progress very slowly on this front. From nobody Mon Mar 16 03:35:44 2020 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 E07903A2281 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 03:35:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=d02PQz7M; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=TkCa4gxt 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 Iah95WIaEMLP for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 03:35:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A05C73A2280 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 03:35:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1963; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584354937; x=1585564537; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=3j8HfRw8K4BJ5c+I17kY7o3sWtBKqSp1eS/JC7b5hJs=; b=d02PQz7MI2jIFOUoay/tvHC3O7YxkyxWZVGdIqf0MvX8emGOZJAGRYEU OSzt1QtL1w/dcU7hSQNC0Zzij3wpxYDKb60yi8/8Wj0/BNlxwvr5fk6U0 rwwoq7ZLDsgHCWVozdmP8/hZPsQmTQh0O4BZ39dPu8txMMAcDVB8mAukc M=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3ApdGyUB+dCyyCFP9uRHGN82YQeigqvan1NQcJ65?= =?us-ascii?q?0hzqhDabmn44+8ZB7E/fs4iljPUM2b8P9Ch+fM+4HYEW0bqdfk0jgZdYBUER?= =?us-ascii?q?oMiMEYhQslVdSaCEnnK/jCZC0hF8MEX1hgrDm2?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ASBwC+VW9e/4MNJK1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFbFggBAsqCodRA4pzToIRmBiBQoEQA1QJAQEBDAEBGAs?= =?us-ascii?q?KAgQBAYRDAoIeJDgTAgMBAQsBAQUBAQECAQUEbYVWDIVjAQEBAQMBARAoBgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BLAwLBAIBCA4DBAEBFgkQJwsdCAIEARIIGoMFgkoDLgEDC6B7AoE5iGKCJ4J?= =?us-ascii?q?/AQEFhSEYggwDBoE4jC4agUE/gRFHgk0+gmQBAYEeKSA9gwSCLLBBCoI8lw6?= =?us-ascii?q?bQ48Em1sCBAIEBQIOAQEFgWkigUQMCHAVO4JsUBgNjh2Dc4UUhUF0gSmNMQG?= =?us-ascii?q?BDwEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,560,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="726411868" Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 16 Mar 2020 10:35:36 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (xch-rcd-002.cisco.com [173.37.102.12]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02GAZaUU012906 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:35:36 GMT Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (173.37.102.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 05:35:36 -0500 Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 05:35:36 -0500 Received: from NAM11-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:35:35 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=M/cvvhCqExoKX1HBW23wt6mQNkX74++7H6WcHdm2jXNRuI122DRCr5ZuBF3q9idZCUb1GICwMYMecZoqw834Ne9XXz2OZj2vKa3vpwlE+7BLsQT/nsiLbb4cWP4VUQMrXwPCWVoKY/oRz0giUHYTLiShlDxqzF0SNbwJKjJqV+ZazaN0wNHGHA0zpLg1shFtMCb/AgV0eYEOFh1WuQBlOmMvMeu6hho+4hin58V8YdQQ3cyah4zR649sYLTKJsQ1Dw4jwLdZer6x6VgSyb0WlPF8mrt3TmTpu7NILv4YTCMXI3J/XCgrgwYyOeKzSTwBn2jkjAOMzu4qWWn2+wpjHw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=cScCdOu046ETYkNAGtbqVFxpRq5kdC7/JHPwcbhpI80=; b=O98f+WOv4y+2opCxljQyQax148KuGkbpI0ckdgtR/IGhuCXQD3cOx1DlFd04et3zrHaqL3pX419qIA2DDz+YZWURydhj+3YM1FPaW2WBV/8QRkKXIJT+uHxiD9a1yXjlhP8V/hzLCT9zP9WXqdqjwrNzJfEAER8Jz1A3BRM55AtNl2qYH1wPzwRU8qfZwMSnnpY6QvJwGbWqdhRaKYpSoGKrzcXi8ekXN/6Grz1qZMpIMdJ1P1eRGL5Q9a9muqlKFuPyQuFFoAUlsQjuXGKAyWMz1pYYEA4SFJDcrTv5eSlb2AFtJDB5kf6MS7CHwXRbPfsIOd3lqw2RFyZR9TBHQg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=cScCdOu046ETYkNAGtbqVFxpRq5kdC7/JHPwcbhpI80=; b=TkCa4gxttv0eIicFuSMYMZp0I3DHzcvewCHXWVP13pxBcVJDPiR778LP+5eisSoB5Y8ARKi9mZpqZSxLErEy3BOoT/hJfVMeScw8NTDdBGWApR57y5oXTtSXiSCsOOpye9nLWlby/5VXvjDKrEtvU8vLe+3Gyg8l6GYi6PqDbHw= Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:190::17) by MN2PR11MB3855.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:f6::31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.22; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:35:35 +0000 Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2814.018; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:35:35 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: Martin Thomson , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fVOrEs0dx38kq7fR7QMBYfoahLBE6Q Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:35:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [82.15.79.32] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c6faf3ca-d177-4a75-7618-08d7c995c2d7 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3855: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 03449D5DD1 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(376002)(366004)(346002)(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(199004)(86362001)(76116006)(66946007)(66446008)(64756008)(66476007)(81166006)(81156014)(8936002)(8676002)(66556008)(5660300002)(52536014)(478600001)(33656002)(7696005)(53546011)(966005)(6506007)(316002)(9686003)(110136005)(55016002)(2906002)(26005)(186003)(71200400001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB3855; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: cRbEpyccBWUXR/52JN4n9L0iI3fUdJEAv5bA7uxcSCaX7U13mdlhFquX7Bn9F16ayKbfETdgnc06dPN+s2Lm8Sz7o7rK1nQ7cpqqM49gMFajkjIA0muCplhPt9NcFtilx7dg6oAxN4uNdyOb/2bUMA== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c6faf3ca-d177-4a75-7618-08d7c995c2d7 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Mar 2020 10:35:35.1465 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: T7VW8RzhRvwr3JSkDKSutc/poPH9HAnp8+pK3Ipz6d86YYc6Lhckz21rHAWu91mk82vreaAfCmSSd6d4tq6S2g== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3855 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.12, xch-rcd-002.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-1.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 16 Mar 2020 10:35:42 -0000 Hi Martin, My concern goes two ways: 1) If the owner is a single AD and that AD becomes unavailable then that co= uld cause problems. Hence why I think the approach of having all area dire= ctors in the working group area as owners is better than just the responsib= le AD. 2) Adding the Secretariat as the owner to all repos puts more power and ris= k in the hands of a single account. Hence why I propose that we don't add = the Secretariat as an owner by default. Thanks, Rob > -----Original Message----- > From: Ietf-and-github On Behalf Of > Martin Thomson > Sent: 16 March 2020 04:03 > To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org > Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs >=20 > In discussion with Rob Wilton, the question about recommendations for > organization ownership was raised. >=20 > The using-github draft says: >=20 > > The owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area > Directors. >=20 > The -configuration drafts says: >=20 > > Initialize the organization by designating the IETF Secretariat and the > area directors in the working group's area as owners. If the responsible > AD for the working group is from another area, that AD will be an owner a= s > well. >=20 > On face value, this is different, but it is at least consistent. The > strictures in the policy are narrower in terms of requirements than the > concrete implementation of that policy. >=20 > I'm reading Rob's concern to be primarily about redundancy. An AD who > becomes unreachable might render the organization inaccessible or > unusable. Do you think that we should recommend or require inclusion of > more people in the using-github draft to match the configuration draft? >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github From nobody Mon Mar 16 04:49:45 2020 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 A79CD3A2349; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 04:49:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=DENblN17; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=yuHkqqHr 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 rt72l9RX90zf; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 04:49:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEFFB3A2347; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 04:49:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3515; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584359368; x=1585568968; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=zzh/7wdLiknjcLyBJ0Y+xMVJraAkbB03L46in45CYlQ=; b=DENblN17kJAgj7oxYbG0kjOBaSy+5lDCRaqWLaTBro5IkuiIDpia5XrK fJSRN+Psrf1GZ4ul8BuYFtMI4airdTo75FaLvpH1V4uLwQ5Kxj4+hCW4X Wq7oQae339IfWxKXDc9VvLSuv/DQPKIC2oIGgjghcaqy2lK7GgFNAGbVz c=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AzCuS/BRD3HJPLJ4RRlIgWF3h+dpsv++ubAcI9p?= =?us-ascii?q?oqja5Pea2//pPkeVbS/uhpkESXBdfA8/wRje3QvuigQmEG7Zub+FE6OJ1XH1?= =?us-ascii?q?5g640NmhA4RsuMCEn1NvnvOjYlHcBeU1lN9HCgOk8TE8H7NBXf?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CcBQByZ29e/4UNJK1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFbFggBAsqCodRA4pzgl+YGIFCgRADVAkBAQEMAQEjCgI?= =?us-ascii?q?EAQGEQwKCHyQ4EwIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEFBG2FVgyFYwEBAQECARIoBgEBNwE?= =?us-ascii?q?LBAIBCA4DBAEBARUJEDIdCAEBBAENBQgTB4MFgkoDDiABAwuhEAKBOYhigie?= =?us-ascii?q?CfwEBBYEvAYQHGIIMAwaBOIljgksagUE/gRFHgk0+gmQBAYEeAR0rPYMEgiy?= =?us-ascii?q?NVYk2iXSPQgqCPIdWjzibQ48EiQGSWgIEAgQFAg4BAQWBaSKBRAwIcBU7gmx?= =?us-ascii?q?QGA2OHYNzilV0DYEci36BMwGBDwEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,560,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="462577781" Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 16 Mar 2020 11:49:27 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (xch-aln-005.cisco.com [173.36.7.15]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02GBnRRg019534 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:49:27 GMT Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (173.36.7.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:49:27 -0500 Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:49:26 -0500 Received: from NAM12-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:49:26 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=XXzLVOfTkVcrwa8cWHJ622MiCjqBu+XTfiYdcQAujcrosDHsD17jS6ZVxFMNdzHyLp59o9wIKGSdCkmnG9quLxKhUJBBh6QzwELRYnM8DABZJFpcwJzZ7Po79DQYQToMb5bwmSH2e39nCH9i+sEa8zY2Z8RBofzQyfIEOAeP7AOH0KDMx1hBnwBVOOXQIKscoqKRmYXZcqt8p1ungeFfLODyQjvmdJPxcI0CHUjEO5sGZxm88m3XlyCztDC3SUqF4tEJSC/vuaZuKqHuSLkujXRwql5GxplmmxonEu457suktFslluAGPrgYamSe39DHvT2BNP8U9qzgsLXhM2F1xg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=DgdZseuFvFVZSdLOCDrw/UfOUrbAMoqVGb1dB/6UQrU=; b=MFrADQXehcqqAiHfRc+IUvEehluLzrMRHFEayTyxgUTjkAuBJqPwlISLezBtl5evxL7r0QGfQ6vprVw1lC9OQnO/jJ9VDG2rAjQ2OXM2iO99wD4qJ55ET/DqMdFspNMIUIrWlyuh+CTYgkwd4rZDxvctHFnoYxvGZXsAjMkPJihvuyZVP3/jV29frblSJjWn/I1v0UR6oHucdAy2yYihBe1lKO9VjlOpeKlanbRoz9S0TGPyl2e32KpokeUQ4c2+JO6dfPk8CzAUc9jsVfcFhFO80voPVq85A3tlev1hVBKMzzu204SS+JEh8LEpLrciFLIuA/qJLoas9vEswEplZw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=DgdZseuFvFVZSdLOCDrw/UfOUrbAMoqVGb1dB/6UQrU=; b=yuHkqqHrixti6zyv14EMn/6Y5pCeKBLnBzL5JnCRptvlx7b/ltLsIuoYQL/stB8aoiHKb14lnVckIVocHyl6iGx35xoyd3c3hAvKwLdgdU1I4tgEdhRmssuOo2JduGL2bMoShMb+CFespQvCu8y8uS4TCAyXrWd1GqBfAp+Sg6I= Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:190::17) by MN2PR11MB4112.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:137::16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.18; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:49:25 +0000 Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2814.018; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:49:25 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: Martin Thomson , The IESG , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , Christopher Wood Thread-Topic: RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 Thread-Index: AdX20DXn6nk7ia9BTXi3bSvYC2yFiwAnJ+6AAAcSpnAA7/5gAAAPRwuw Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:49:25 +0000 Message-ID: References: <03a88995-a64b-4214-a408-1e826f3ecc9a@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [82.15.79.32] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: f171738d-79f2-4d14-b2c7-08d7c9a0139e x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB4112: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 03449D5DD1 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(346002)(136003)(376002)(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(199004)(33656002)(316002)(7696005)(110136005)(478600001)(54906003)(5660300002)(186003)(26005)(52536014)(8936002)(4326008)(86362001)(8676002)(76116006)(2906002)(66446008)(64756008)(66946007)(81156014)(66556008)(66476007)(71200400001)(81166006)(9686003)(55016002)(6506007)(53546011)(966005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB4112; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: Mw8ZaOayi4h36jJpzwnIa2OZ2yikQfiJOTjedHsiSaFHX478z6MqdgVf6mg2IsKt8vAgyGr5qI1BMiygeYrstSUnKp9qDZOYovngTPrP9ojVIcblw17yceYNIJjK6h8cqh9CupDfmGZ8Py6HlyK1uw== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f171738d-79f2-4d14-b2c7-08d7c9a0139e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Mar 2020 11:49:25.5293 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: N0EakdH9Glu3jUwdcbm1vUO6fndZ3cc5K0sQ6eSQgYpc0NW4gzcV0aWWhNtVeXZ8eezjTgXmBoThs2eTkeUxfQ== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB4112 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.15, xch-aln-005.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-11.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 16 Mar 2020 11:49:31 -0000 Hi Martin, > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Thomson > Sent: 16 March 2020 04:12 > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) ; The IESG ; > draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org > Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org; git-chairs@ietf.org; Christopher Wood > > Subject: Re: RobWilton review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-05 >=20 > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 23:03, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > > I personally think that having a > > > backup is sensible. At the same time, having a single account with > > > access to many repositories is a bit scary. > > [RW] > > Hum yes, maybe having the Secretariat on all WGs is not a good choice. > > Perhaps we should say that all ADs for the area should be owners > > rather than just the responsible AD, and there must always be a > > minimum of 2 owners? So, for the general area perhaps it would be the > > AD and the Secretariat? > > > > Obviously this would need to be aligned with the config draft. >=20 > I will raise the question with the WG, as it is not limited to this draft= . > The -configuration draft has a broader net that includes the responsible > AD, the ADs for the area, and the secretariat. [RW]=20 Thanks. >=20 > > [RW] > > My concern is less about losing the data (since that is being backed > > up), but more about losing control of an account/organization that is > > under the IETF's name. I'm not sure what policies Github has for > > recovering an account/organisation that one loses control over, but > > I'm sure it would be hassle, and embarrassing. >=20 > I'm sure that the process is torturous. I tagged some text on to other > changes I'm making. See https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using- > github/pull/52/commits/302feb524c457f10a3fea21dcee140bd5dc6218e [RW]=20 This looks along the right lines to me. I would suggest adding "users" to = the list of folks who should use best security practices, but happy to leav= e this to your discretion. >=20 > > FWIW: It is this sort of article that I am concerned about: > > https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2019/03/25/thousands-of-coders-are-le > > aving-their-crown-jewels-exposed-on-github/ > > > > Some of the contributors to IETF will be quite new to git/github etc, > > so really it is about warning them about stuff they should be careful > > to avoid. Even a sentence or two in the security considerations might > > help. >=20 > I think that this is a question of scope. Personally, I think that's > going a little outside the remit of the draft. And I'd rather attack thi= s > particular problem with tools. [RW]=20 I agree, that tooling is the best solution to this. I think that tooling, in addition to the paragraph that you linked to above= , is enough for me. >=20 > > FWIW, it is this sort of issue that I am concerned about: > > https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/44010/is-ipv10- > > a-joke-or-a-serious-rfc-draft >=20 > Ah, that old problem. :/ >=20 > I don't think that we can help with that, other than avoiding paving the > path to having something look official. We've talked about having tools > like xml2rfc produce different styling for individual drafts than is used > for presenting "official" content on IETF-controlled servers. That might > help, though things progress very slowly on this front. [RW]=20 I agree. Thanks for incorporating my review comments. Regards, Rob From nobody Mon Mar 16 07:05:08 2020 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 C0D923A08C5 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:05:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 2v0zi0cTf7WQ for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 9FBF03A08BD for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122333.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02GDhPDU018618; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:05:02 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=6CrWoSCZXaDcF9yb3I+unMqe4AkyfUyOfluu3hFXR0A=; b=L9DBLfeyMBRbJPe25YBNoZ9tznwXli1V72GKXwfW/LRHlAuQAyov9Lb3emRCEgMmzhcI K0AFZvjCW6sSUGlclKL5LtGycamYxJwe8NqbThdvjTWkkQjmFdNNMLbhIxn7ILxMz5Lr dXZFmNkMSb1XU94SXnXg9GWgRIGxAxphsfc81rwjRW2J0t9vZrsPPSralkkwBTUdpCsi tYXOEwup8mFpevKvEGsAcYiYonSr0JA52PHCr+NeqtXpUgN37YFRNSU2mNeiGDNuzk5h 73PCQTkhu4mFtVU7TS+ZMzdbPiCLtRiOq0UIWriMChdcIN/QpHkezhsjQmYwNKzm+0Di fg== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [184.51.33.19] (may be forged)) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2yrva5ye9p-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:05:02 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02GDlRA1019137; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:05:01 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.34]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrtkvcyhg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:05:00 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:05:00 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:04:59 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fLpgVLWAg4aEiFanXBcfrtZKhLQTKA Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:04:59 +0000 Message-ID: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.118.20] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <0E5C7B370DCEE84EB6E8E364D62BCB5E@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-16_03:2020-03-12, 2020-03-16 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003160068 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-16_03:2020-03-12, 2020-03-16 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=990 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003160068 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 16 Mar 2020 14:05:05 -0000 SW4gdGhlIGNhc2VzIEknbSBmYW1pbGlhciB3aXRoLCB3ZSBoYXZlIDIrIEFEJ3MgYW5kIDIgV0cg Y2hhaXJzLiAgSSB0aGluayB0aGF0J3MgZW5vdWdoIHJlZHVuZGFuY3kuDQoNCkhvdyBhYm91dCBz YXlpbmcgImZvdXIgb3IgbW9yZSBwZW9wbGUgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGFkbWluJ3Mgb2YgdGhlIG9yZ2Fu aXphdGlvbiIgIEFuZCBpZiB0aGUgc2VjcmV0YXJpYXQgd291bGQgY3JlYXRlIGEgInJvbGUiIGFj Y291bnQgKG5vdCB0aWVkIHRvIGFueSB1c2VyLCBqdXN0IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBmb3IgYW55IHNlY3Jl dGFyaWF0IHN0YWZmIHdobyBuZWVkIGl0KSwgdGhhdCBjb3VsZCBiZSBhIGJhY2t1cC4NCiANCg0K From nobody Mon Mar 16 21:21:16 2020 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 044813A1743 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 21:21:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=kFGkGbRq; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=AEI9UMYq 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 6XEP7LFLJB_G for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 21:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCE793A1741 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 21:21:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28388641; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 00:21:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 00:21:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=8RdmkBAq5xKDHAF/P+JxsJUn/HmQ3EJ yFQ0hy1LalJk=; b=kFGkGbRqNZhZMCnyNfOHIASomI05e2jbCqVwmSTc4bXJk/j zMdwPyQAmv3xDILNEface1736c0INcU04KOInWnzAbmZHxYQqpma8laB9H4nzeks aApFy44/ZqvfxT611Rq3mvtawgadl/yTFnNNZiCA1CHBkF+S6I8ul9KkqBNKSR79 8kJspM9vMaBxhpMXuCFMNakXVtoTBb6iujg7JpauNqVHfW9XllHj0HscoVl+XpXl uwTzwLUrajgy9h5ji5ovX7ByuoQUDbdJE3nmld9yBg6GMg98hUHMuOBLb5uPt2Ma 1OZD+LbkeWDQ7HQSHtERK1dv9O4X/a38r/01IbA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=8RdmkB Aq5xKDHAF/P+JxsJUn/HmQ3EJyFQ0hy1LalJk=; b=AEI9UMYqYoXGekJIn88II6 ixf/hz5xFG/2YanFbCU4QWFPfSptJJYJjPRlDsMty5blxz7X8/8h+EhQaPxBOjlM s5L49PfudpWQ7IVxsWGzLrkU+SkN5gYyYQUCxaRu4h0Z2DyjpLTH9+OLk7oSaZjL tYny7YOvvPcD9FIKEiljbRd+xOa6tMyP+sHk5gGLJ3Bnh3Nk2DPuQ12kjxzmmSLJ uiL3R5hHZBT8NEs53SaspRoyLm2y3Z67sM70z04QK8sLSKdLeVfn1MsoeM+Bzno3 AqTzIlqRldmmQACbB9lC/iOVyRklejUvMvHvddyLIlkTV2923ySEY6VCiS46aa4g == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefgedgieelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuve hluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6A827E00B5; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 00:21:08 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:20:48 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Salz, Rich" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 04:21:14 -0000 On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 01:04, Salz, Rich wrote: > In the cases I'm familiar with, we have 2+ AD's and 2 WG chairs. I > think that's enough redundancy. I agree. Though I think that if we are to set a hard limit, then it should be 2, not more. Obviously, with the number of potential owners, we could have more. Here is where I'm at right now: > GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner. The owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area Directors and SHOULD include Area Directors from the area and the IETF Secretariat. Area Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an owner. Working Group chairs MAY also be owners. An organization MUST have at least 2 owners. From nobody Tue Mar 17 06:51:16 2020 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 350463A0793 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:51:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 XKMco9LfxuR5 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:51:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 13D723A078F for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:51:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050102.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02HDgAck008822; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 13:51:11 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=rA6JeaqmOsmHsRB3ThJR2eSgWtqBLFwQ1qw+ZRKK4rM=; b=UsXfa9Mzm9jZOA3xH8K3vTypUtkM0oCIQt89GqrG6/PJ7NsFOEHNIFfff89DsK2Zfjg0 YTilrsDvaxtfdCPk2cl3GUzhultuB176/wcRljpx47Q2LT7frgKBPG2MWdlHb3E/MlRa A9wplsYC1lgBfdluhgfGQTWX134E/UpEZX6mxHrJxU2NOkcp8Qq8L4imIXhisBbTRrQC MCiPKZvrqmkCKKPlMf9Juztp+hhunn/eT+uoT9ju63fpaQ2l0N55ony2wGKTCAhq0ybK TEJv/i9ojqQDJbTQxk3XMybhvmvjWzNLnm02T/lVZxa1nOo2JNTDI2+4+I8MUm5jLkzN iQ== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2yrn7hp48u-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 13:51:11 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02HDlkXB026031; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:51:10 -0700 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrw87amhm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:51:10 -0700 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) by usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 09:51:09 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 09:51:09 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 09:51:09 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fLpgVLWAg4aEiFanXBcfrtZKhLQTKAgAEyKwCAAFxLAA== Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 13:51:08 +0000 Message-ID: <1EC60813-BC3F-4BB7-A071-CE5BD6AAEC9C@akamai.com> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.117.157] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <9FEA2109B715C34CBDD0126726782A9C@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_05:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=745 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003170060 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_05:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=710 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003170060 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 13:51:15 -0000 ICAgID4gR2l0SHViIHJlcXVpcmVzIHRoYXQgZWFjaCBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24gaGF2ZSBhdCBsZWFz dCBvbmUgb3duZXIuICBUaGUgb3duZXJzIGZvciBhIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAgcmVwb3NpdG9yeSBN VVNUIGluY2x1ZGUgcmVzcG9uc2libGUgQXJlYSBEaXJlY3RvcnMgYW5kIFNIT1VMRCBpbmNsdWRl IEFyZWEgRGlyZWN0b3JzIGZyb20gdGhlIGFyZWEgYW5kIHRoZSBJRVRGIFNlY3JldGFyaWF0LiAg QXJlYSBEaXJlY3RvcnMgTUFZIGFsc28gZGVzaWduYXRlIGEgZGVsZWdhdGUgdGhhdCBiZWNvbWVz IGFuIG93bmVyLiBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIGNoYWlycyBNQVkgYWxzbyBiZSBvd25lcnMuICBBbiBv cmdhbml6YXRpb24gTVVTVCBoYXZlIGF0IGxlYXN0IDIgb3duZXJzLg0KDQpNYXliZSBwdXQgdGhl IGxhc3Qgc2VudGVuY2Ugam9pbmVkIHRvIHRoZSBmaXJzdCwgbGlrZSAiYnV0IHRoaXMgUkZDIHJl cXVpcmVzIHRoYXQgLi4uIiAgRWl0aGVyIHdheSwgbG9va3MgZmluZSB0byBtZS4NCiAgICANCg0K From nobody Tue Mar 17 07:21:47 2020 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 74EA03A083C for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 07:21:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=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 iy2QAWsn0OnM for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 07:21:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22b.google.com (mail-lj1-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 B42433A082A for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 07:21:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22b.google.com with SMTP id f10so23063680ljn.6 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 07:21:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VRheT1v6NzsyLa/g5B4lEEJIhYc1nS2oEjMdAU9fhds=; b=TWNwBpnRBsZ1ShnDy/hrgpR47aZD+68td7K20JW4qphjcYmxL198AMD+m9o2Oz6MiL 0rFr8GqexogM5xE2CMm/Pe3trtVotx2jfKx3BZOrFo35bO/JxRMkDb2nP3tQ4ZbZHiPV JQXQVScah0KqIWpTRJF3GApZK30ube3tG/FZ9+DdiTfF/ImI1NoT88SXl3z6dZmyJ3f6 j7PY04JsppnSuO8McU/yZhyRDuztgiU/4vj9cukoET3KUhnGlqDlhxrVK4InDGnNmeSI 1yhIUBqK3pj4aU9neB+tG6XlmLUcMtRr/NyOoMZS8SY9bOd7VOMaXucy8eZhodtlf8mE eHpw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VRheT1v6NzsyLa/g5B4lEEJIhYc1nS2oEjMdAU9fhds=; b=bjQJmJ8jA2DQytwFL2v27j/yubfeJGGO5trU+RueZl8xcY5ZNbHjsU9F9R9S3B0e7X qf4dHMVQ6gU9ELruIlSfMfsILQoXWsxF6h/2v5Wz+rsy20q3Ezlt4y6L3cUVRTfkEyPN oU5B2z1ZBZvVn7PNzjgOp69Z3vngfNeOCweX+/L4OKrc6FJ0IC09ZrZT3Eq9b5M9pELU jmPgAidgHW8foBjgF8PFBwRr62sR/tyAAHBsHydpn1Lw5tug312jeES5Ng3zw16ryLKU 9gdPzw2IYV87mqTYsLSOM/MXN0aIyG99pWAErOsotdryxzs+CW1QmMAzZl38s0L01NnM 0R2w== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ28Nbi3mYIWBAKRAxLaP/wWhpsKRyiVYmVdG/k5j2VlUBgju4Eo 6AjtdkNhXh+FKMwC95erwM4sGe24JkD6kgK8p5Bjzg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuVoY+3u+iTVkRdbqln7Se5SrlnYmJcz4W6fYx7RCEc21md9Tf4d2JUGrayaaLg/6Bn5kNrVXvLqO2vb+WGB4o= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:81cc:: with SMTP id s12mr3048837ljg.35.1584454884916; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 07:21:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Eric Rescorla Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 07:20:48 -0700 Message-ID: To: Martin Thomson Cc: "Salz, Rich" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org, " , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009411af05a10da629" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 14:21:46 -0000 --0000000000009411af05a10da629 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi folks, I think it's a mistake to overindex on trying to minimize the power of the secretariat here. Remember that these are just tools we use to develop our drafts and the secretariat *already* controls the tools we use to do our official work (the mailing list, drafts repo, data tracker). For that reason, I believe having them do this work as much as practical increases our overall efficiency without incurring undue risk. -Ekr On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:21 PM Martin Thomson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 01:04, Salz, Rich wrote: > > In the cases I'm familiar with, we have 2+ AD's and 2 WG chairs. I > > think that's enough redundancy. > > I agree. Though I think that if we are to set a hard limit, then it > should be 2, not more. Obviously, with the number of potential owners, we > could have more. Here is where I'm at right now: > > > GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner. The > owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area > Directors and SHOULD include Area Directors from the area and the IETF > Secretariat. Area Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an > owner. Working Group chairs MAY also be owners. An organization MUST have > at least 2 owners. > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > --0000000000009411af05a10da629 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi folks,

I think it's a= mistake to overindex on trying to minimize the power of the secretariat he= re. Remember that these are just tools we use to develop our drafts and the= secretariat *already* controls the tools we use to do our official work (t= he mailing list, drafts repo, data tracker). For that reason, I believe hav= ing them do this work as much as practical increases our overall efficiency= without incurring undue risk.

-Ekr

=

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:21 PM Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 01:04, Salz, R= ich wrote:
> In the cases I'm familiar with, we have 2+ AD's and 2 WG chair= s.=C2=A0 I
> think that's enough redundancy.

I agree.=C2=A0 Though I think that if we are to set a hard limit, then it s= hould be 2, not more.=C2=A0 Obviously, with the number of potential owners,= we could have more.=C2=A0 Here is where I'm at right now:

> GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner.=C2=A0 = The owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area Dir= ectors and SHOULD include Area Directors from the area and the IETF Secreta= riat.=C2=A0 Area Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an ow= ner. Working Group chairs MAY also be owners.=C2=A0 An organization MUST ha= ve at least 2 owners.

_______________________________________________
Ietf-and-github mailing list
Ietf-and-gith= ub@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-= github
--0000000000009411af05a10da629-- From nobody Tue Mar 17 11:56:01 2020 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 D38673A0B1C for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 11:55:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UFBHUWM_XMHu for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 11:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 410AD3A0B11 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 11:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id f10so24177636ljn.6 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 11:55:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qPJgEqcn1HmMjV2mi6TlQDZrz5ywP6KmSo8+loTIn40=; b=uHeFz4yPROX4UYBGWStFlsKpKWr+IHsNS6c4llhhgWEZp9XM0+XX24su1sG6Rdq9Fs OeoClx2FiZxvJXzuGtIgsPNzpagBXl+FKpFvmYYLf4pQJQ0XqoM6ZFD0LIfH0wKCdMOm aTTj/8OqPRJ94FdpEsFfrSqHnW8Vi3cmsb+Q4XcPTxtq8Ps5VE00sNRZIf3vzhgIrJlN HxkMsUEBqtWJLkVAGbnbq6q5vQDWwCObwM1x3fbcnfamrKBYTgomlmqJwip8jUQ1ByEX o5TEN9ErjpH/8u2oOXkuEa9a4xCpGnRaNh8FX3VBCa2bW6xtdCs9Z/SXHTNo6kEjJw8x 0XTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qPJgEqcn1HmMjV2mi6TlQDZrz5ywP6KmSo8+loTIn40=; b=DuPkzU7oJkmrHqfDQuNdC5ctk1hciP9rQDG4jE7Qt+JTKk4mq0pJvcwZ3Hi2/4KhlW kU07I5UdkVL4xl327UlWk2sDruv+a0YsXSNDO/oP+yvCOV3KR0Dd5RI9qn2G9ivVwL7y hhUcLJqB2bQqhPGOQpeMJSqee5sLKVmSezmPf+dWth5s1LlkmMQwLPogCuEdHxMpLwdq kJYfooRhkH6FKoO91szAb9Lofww6RkywStdz2Bz1gqPtj1hyA1l2YxSZ2xlvxnA2Qdd8 AISJRResYBmtH2HsOT4/hS+lqo/n1YOhqLpZCesVWDPiwlvE71VxDag3dF7B+rySvtWy sthA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0Cqs1meQvw/gmpQm/2M2QVQKYeDedNH8VYx7GyGCm3QYx/QsCH 8lpd8Nh2lXMYQL48XJFMZiT52JfJUnG9LXBkvcmxtkeTl3c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuD8HRxeFtZJzjTFsFMO3NK3QGWWlqUDLraDdH/wuHJhGIM0uws+A15YXJBw88PiOqfWROHoCW+h8QMoNNrE7Q= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8e98:: with SMTP id z24mr121863ljk.66.1584471355122; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 11:55:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Warren Kumari Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 14:55:18 -0400 Message-ID: To: Eric Rescorla Cc: Martin Thomson , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "Salz, Rich" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org, " Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 18:56:00 -0000 On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:22 AM Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I think it's a mistake to overindex on trying to minimize the power of th= e secretariat here. Remember that these are just tools we use to develop ou= r drafts and the secretariat *already* controls the tools we use to do our = official work (the mailing list, drafts repo, data tracker). For that reaso= n, I believe having them do this work as much as practical increases our ov= erall efficiency without incurring undue risk. On principle I avoid agreeing with Ekr -- but in this case he's completely right :-) Anyone who believes that the IESG / ADs run anything is, sadly, mistaken - the secretariat is the actual power behind the throne, and ADs are largely figureheads (ok, not really, but fairly close) - the secretariat runs basically all of the tooling, and has access to everything - when an AD wants a document to enter IETF LC, they click a button which triggers the secretariat to actually *do* $magic. When an AD wants a document to show up on the telechat, they click a button - and it's the secretariat who actually schedules it. After balloting, it's the AD who says "Great, approved" - and then the secretariat who says "I think you mean *after* the DISCUSSes are cleared, right? Right?!". I think that having Org owned by the secretariat, and having them add and remove ADs as people roll in and out makes much more sense than having ADs own anything. Alexey is finishing his term, and will be replated - having the secretariat handle this seems like a much better solution than having the ADs swap people in and out... W > > -Ekr > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:21 PM Martin Thomson wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 01:04, Salz, Rich wrote: >> > In the cases I'm familiar with, we have 2+ AD's and 2 WG chairs. I >> > think that's enough redundancy. >> >> I agree. Though I think that if we are to set a hard limit, then it sho= uld be 2, not more. Obviously, with the number of potential owners, we cou= ld have more. Here is where I'm at right now: >> >> > GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner. The o= wners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area Director= s and SHOULD include Area Directors from the area and the IETF Secretariat.= Area Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an owner. Worki= ng Group chairs MAY also be owners. An organization MUST have at least 2 o= wners. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github --=20 I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Tue Mar 17 12:01:22 2020 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 5267F3A0C76 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:01:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 QqOQKRdSfr_9 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:01:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 00FA63A0C9B for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:01:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122331.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02HInVaV001415; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:00:59 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=WjDv1SwHnkJ0gTDxgZmg48Ry/tODfs+zq0zPb6Ys3ds=; b=TEWg0EMXAp5Pp2MycVag2FD0TweMYSg/eIbpd7OX73Ohs77Ga/zEeYhKizpknFa0m5YS ELUbCiE3MP9OZcc2oBXjin9bzuJnls5VV0DKow9NkUG+1Ql/mhKJGSkbRdi8SWcbwY7n go3bAX43OAqK9nFlH7VhjhaDMPG7Mkw3fL4xRy0fAYU2NVrfNewhbebfcbA8iL8kH/wb S9U3SOqPR9JYWMS2e+zkuPT3MTqSEyZuGgkh/cx+Wu1tYpuU/9HYOsE0O16sz4Z6ulRp XJKlGrr+FxSsZBnUo29evZ0sam4xPu7hzAzd2lqfFkC6ngoBpv+xvIoy+pzWJktPWlcM lw== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint8 (prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com [96.6.114.122] (may be forged)) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ys8nhbaxn-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:00:59 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02HIlNKt020408; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:00:57 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.32]) by prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrtkwjmuy-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:00:57 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:00:56 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:00:56 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Warren Kumari , Eric Rescorla CC: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org, " , Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fLpgVLWAg4aEiFanXBcfrtZKhLQTKAgAEyKwCAAKejAIAATLIA//++g4A= Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:00:55 +0000 Message-ID: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.117.157] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <25AAC2619F7FB74E99C8FB6B58837810@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_08:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=753 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003170073 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_08:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=736 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003170073 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 19:01:20 -0000 VGhlcmUgd2FzIG9uZSBjb21tZW50IGFib3V0IGdpdmluZyB0b28gbXVjaCBwb3dlciB0byB0aGUg c2VjcmV0YXJpYXQuIFRoZSBtYWluIHBvaW50IG9mIHRoaXMgdGhyZWFkIGlzICpOT1QqIGFib3V0 IHRoYXQsIGJ1dCByYXRoZXIgbWFraW5nIHN1cmUgdGhlcmUncyBjb250aW51aXR5IGJ5IGhhdmlu ZyBlbm91Z2ggcGVvcGxlLg0KDQpJJ3ZlIGJlZW4gdG9sZCBieSBmb2xrcyB3aG8gYXJlIGxvb2tp bmcgYXQgdGhlIGJhY2t1cCByZXF1aXJlbWVudCwgdGhhdCBpdCByZXF1aXJlcyBhbiBvd25lciBh Y2NvdW50ICh3aGljaCB3YXMgYSBzdXJwcmlzZSB0byBtZSBhbmQgSSB3aWxsIHZlcmlmeSBpdCku IA0KDQo= From nobody Tue Mar 17 12:04:45 2020 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 4D0C43A0C59 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:04:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=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 J1BQgC0zuQqk for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22e.google.com (mail-lj1-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 632293A0AA1 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22e.google.com with SMTP id w4so9493338lji.11 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:04:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iigotV1bliZ+fWh59nkv3c6vJ+eYnB5GWLjrhSpfjfI=; b=tHq9InLLDnZ2qf1JmFft4iEzRLZaDmNNwoBHGoJ9zFgCw4doiX176xNHMVq53NAxtc VezmXChAMrnbuma2DlmZZ4tWNNKKkMREGRI1SdAWl2ndzvpDd1ApyB5O0rZoMqaVfTom uK53G11vrrlki1TFO+hnjCt5sLtO/Wp7WVeH53Rx1VfxCKw533dWEvr7C8PGkBlWf1FZ WG67pRO2W/iZXFlduPgekPceBtZENf48DXTbmVCd+G0fITjBL09efwyHCFhYiAOMlPZh fm8yT5c/OU2Q7iHlqdiy9FpgovhWHJiUMRrTGWupeb1NprE++SKvXvwJv0p7rJR1JYzg 27Mw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iigotV1bliZ+fWh59nkv3c6vJ+eYnB5GWLjrhSpfjfI=; b=GUezcQzL2c2HW3BljVBtE1PmNp5GoQYJlMPVsBuWYT7bs0AMk5py0RsSpNBZkXXlbc r01euCDizoAZRE1Jn9lDaxHKo2nXiFBRy5047C3B9ogPehwrBkbYqvdLM6nyEkkv61gf Wy+LxSrjZEakV2nAMEeiMCDK2pH825EUOcdzZ8zbp9xBvvYQC1mEKEYWxcr1Skc7SJky 5TLRnD6AupoIFdwOxy+HZIhAtBh4B/XwGj37InClrlGBzSFSGpsT9UQeth6/Uyl9ebMS qeRoEb2z4um42H9OZocxzlk8PKo3Q632yuutf5OeHOFsgfiAgcxEuTclY95rceGpSEMl 0kJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1E0ncKSGe1Prg/YgoJtW3jII963kAwkrUhauTi+18JX4z5bfFe hebJWiGUHBWELAITWk93cG1U1TbjyQNZSwaC+hNfPQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vu2M9SR7HhOebDj3mc6OFtsx4s3B4/K/k4KaRqUgs8hMaNkdhUDVX6/pSZpU0n5/LUDfytBulYgJDd+6anY+qA= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b16c:: with SMTP id a12mr127028ljm.83.1584471862396; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:04:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Eric Rescorla Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:03:46 -0700 Message-ID: To: "Salz, Rich" Cc: Warren Kumari , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org, " , Martin Thomson Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000083e3f005a1119a3f" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 19:04:43 -0000 --00000000000083e3f005a1119a3f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 12:01 PM Salz, Rich wrote: > There was one comment about giving too much power to the secretariat. The > main point of this thread is *NOT* about that, but rather making sure > there's continuity by having enough people. > > I've been told by folks who are looking at the backup requirement, that it > requires an owner account (which was a surprise to me and I will verify > it). > My put would be that that should be the secretariat. Then they can provide this as a consistent service. -Ekr --00000000000083e3f005a1119a3f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 12:01 PM Salz= , Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wro= te:
There was on= e comment about giving too much power to the secretariat. The main point of= this thread is *NOT* about that, but rather making sure there's contin= uity by having enough people.

I've been told by folks who are looking at the backup requirement, that= it requires an owner account (which was a surprise to me and I will verify= it).

My put would be that that should= be the secretariat. Then they can provide this as a consistent service.

-Ekr

--00000000000083e3f005a1119a3f-- From nobody Tue Mar 17 12:05:23 2020 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 1ED533A0C52 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:05:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 NtUuUgdP96AZ for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 936263A0A8C for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122332.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02HIqqam025488; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:05:02 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=qA4e5ORmGwalWDzjhtO/Vb/sj1SrGurIe9uto2UUgS4=; b=nyvd2pEjFGUVhej45+8Un434olP0aO0ExpadQ1kNH8TJH9PY/mg9MWzS+4i8s6TXONdO /SFHH2/owoT73xp96fKMIOWbF1nPtxhfDyjosFB7k8QfrF7WagpcAp1fjXF19FOnmR6d qRMbuzBlgdwKWdmsQivSJipptY1Vz98eZEBkfhLVVphuxw9N9plFYUNAUcu2X4ORAnxZ DmDYXUlq9MM1cOQmUkJPIjRQ9LP2WTCTTHcB461hBey0KtUGknzXijwW46BB44saA58b 2jADIBILGPRwaXD51oow19rBFw1a6xepQsLlMrI23U7xoEAdgFgbMyh8E5D0MVeusIZ8 tA== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2yrr6pnjx9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:05:02 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02HIlFrZ005574; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:05:00 -0700 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.57]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrw87aubw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:05:00 -0700 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 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:04:59 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:04:59 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Eric Rescorla CC: Warren Kumari , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fLpgVLWAg4aEiFanXBcfrtZKhLQTKAgAEyKwCAAKejAIAATLIA//++g4CAAEPaAP//vUmA Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:04:59 +0000 Message-ID: <341A03ED-0BCF-4587-8591-EAF260DEC912@akamai.com> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.117.157] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_341A03ED0BCF45878591EAF260DEC912akamaicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_08:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=746 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003170073 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_08:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=725 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003170073 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 19:05:21 -0000 --_000_341A03ED0BCF45878591EAF260DEC912akamaicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 ICAqICAgTXkgcHV0IHdvdWxkIGJlIHRoYXQgdGhhdCBzaG91bGQgYmUgdGhlIHNlY3JldGFyaWF0 LiBUaGVuIHRoZXkgY2FuIHByb3ZpZGUgdGhpcyBhcyBhIGNvbnNpc3RlbnQgc2VydmljZS4NCg0K eXl1cA0K --_000_341A03ED0BCF45878591EAF260DEC912akamaicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <644B777D71CC8F4B991EB3140986895D@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6bz0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6b2ZmaWNlIiB4 bWxuczp3PSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTp3b3JkIiB4bWxuczptPSJo dHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL29mZmljZS8yMDA0LzEyL29tbWwiIHhtbG5zPSJo dHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy9UUi9SRUMtaHRtbDQwIj4NCjxoZWFkPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVp dj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KPG1l dGEgbmFtZT0iR2VuZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCAxNSAoZmlsdGVyZWQg bWVkaXVtKSI+DQo8c3R5bGU+PCEtLQ0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGZvbnQtZmFj ZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6NSAwIDAgMCAwIDAgMCAwIDAg MDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYW1icmlhIE1hdGgiOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0x OjIgNCA1IDMgNSA0IDYgMyAyIDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJp Ow0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgMTUgNSAyIDIgMiA0IDMgMiA0O30NCi8qIFN0eWxlIERlZmluaXRpb25z ICovDQpwLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgbGkuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBkaXYuTXNvTm9ybWFsDQoJe21hcmdpbjow aW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7fQ0KcC5Nc29MaXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoLCBsaS5Nc29M aXN0UGFyYWdyYXBoLCBkaXYuTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6 MzQ7DQoJbWFyZ2luLXRvcDowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLXJpZ2h0OjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t OjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tbGVmdDouNWluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmO30NCnNwYW4u RW1haWxTdHlsZTE4DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOnBlcnNvbmFsLXJlcGx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmOw0KCWNvbG9yOndpbmRvd3RleHQ7fQ0KLk1zb0NocERl ZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9ubHk7DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDt9 DQpAcGFnZSBXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7c2l6ZTo4LjVpbiAxMS4waW47DQoJbWFyZ2luOjEuMGlu IDEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluO30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2VjdGlv bjE7fQ0KLyogTGlzdCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGxpc3QgbDANCgl7bXNvLWxpc3QtaWQ6ODg3 Njg4NzQxOw0KCW1zby1saXN0LXR5cGU6aHlicmlkOw0KCW1zby1saXN0LXRlbXBsYXRlLWlkczo4 NDYwNzEzNTQgLTg4OTQwMDM5NiA2NzY5ODY5MSA2NzY5ODY5MyA2NzY5ODY4OSA2NzY5ODY5MSA2 NzY5ODY5MyA2NzY5ODY4OSA2NzY5ODY5MSA2NzY5ODY5Mzt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDENCgl7 bXNvLWxldmVsLXN0YXJ0LWF0Ojc4MTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7 DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674OYOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1s ZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJbXNvLWFu c2ktZm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7DQoJbXNvLWZhcmVh c3QtZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IlRpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbiI7DQoJbXNvLWJpZGktZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 Q2FsaWJyaTsNCgltc28tYW5zaS1mb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsMg0K CXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6bzsNCglt c28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7 DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDb3VyaWVyIE5ldyI7fQ0KQGxp c3QgbDA6bGV2ZWwzDQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2 ZWwtdGV4dDrvgqc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJl ci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5n ZGluZ3M7DQoJbXNvLWJpZGktZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVs NA0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674K3 Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246 bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6U3ltYm9sOw0KCW1zby1i aWRpLWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlN5bWJvbDt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDUNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51 bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Om87DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1z dG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50 Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ291cmllciBOZXciO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNg0K CXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674KnOw0K CW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVm dDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzOw0KCW1zby1i aWRpLWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OldpbmdkaW5nczt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDcNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVs LW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Ou+CtzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwt dGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1p bmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlN5bWJvbDsNCgltc28tYmlkaS1mb250LWZhbWls eTpTeW1ib2w7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw4DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1 bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDpvOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1z by1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6IkNvdXJpZXIgTmV3Ijt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDkNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51 bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Ou+CpzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFi LXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRl bnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OldpbmdkaW5nczsNCgltc28tYmlkaS1mb250LWZhbWls eTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7fQ0Kb2wNCgl7bWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTowaW47fQ0KdWwNCgl7bWFyZ2luLWJv dHRvbTowaW47fQ0KLS0+PC9zdHlsZT4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBsaW5r PSJibHVlIiB2bGluaz0icHVycGxlIj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMSI+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8dWwgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi10b3A6MGluIiB0eXBlPSJkaXNjIj4N CjxsaSBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjBpbjttc28t bGlzdDpsMCBsZXZlbDEgbGZvMSI+TXkgcHV0IHdvdWxkIGJlIHRoYXQgdGhhdCBzaG91bGQgYmUg dGhlIHNlY3JldGFyaWF0LiBUaGVuIHRoZXkgY2FuIHByb3ZpZGUgdGhpcyBhcyBhIGNvbnNpc3Rl bnQgc2VydmljZS48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvbGk+PC91bD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNz PSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+ eXl1cDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Jv ZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_341A03ED0BCF45878591EAF260DEC912akamaicom_-- From nobody Tue Mar 17 12:12:54 2020 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 04EC93A0B51 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:12:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E-VK7HnoMq0N for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:12:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-x12f.google.com (mail-lf1-x12f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12f]) (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 1C0703A0B46 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:12:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12f.google.com with SMTP id s1so18201376lfd.3 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:12:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pWpS4h1Duo2Nz1Q8I5AxioS41KFn8PEQUXAfUz/0ixo=; b=fpxmt2L6OUonRuBVAIL86dt3cP1rnASy4IIp/36gqkueFL3s1UaAe0oUlAmkYC/Lsp X/FZkrVm2gbPRI/ZPRcp3eyGVpOyx2qRYAjY5wkXSN8lvpWIqJm53ajprQjsRbVMiWlb sWjZNbDgCkPcLAeIJbZKKi+nfx1Oze3ECvCDnof45j2UCrlavqqC8ZpiLknFlwrrRDx4 gVCkLo6F8Mh/M7eKQKdGja/Hgv8dpVsGn1UvfdARbNevaKe4t3vYzemxPfhzcYo2lK6f yZ/qVRKgc+Bq26aLK+QmRwusFZPVQTnu+9bzES+wOZgg4nc3Ft/7tIymae1E5mljAwK8 4qnw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pWpS4h1Duo2Nz1Q8I5AxioS41KFn8PEQUXAfUz/0ixo=; b=WJM1MdeN7DXxk9LtayMzthnyY5MqxQ4miLsd6GHGiyzrUgCATaPeyIM1MkSD+U7P7V qil0qFz3yvApfvyhtYEYh0ARMaTTmxdwfJsODYMrl6zz8FTmCI9o6oLUbDsz3xYq/DUO Wt/Auq5qubqDE48BxHXYuWv+dX6Gps2wLaYqJLCVza7kAFxH4dr2Bn+jefwBFcmr0wpf d9BUFKwih0SyUI+i+pYqvdABuNdPCK1ODHyfzx+yyIQ8N7A+Pq05WZXSYvXZyU3uKdsP gz7y5bt/1JtxCtt12LN2LQ4lew4AxSJVRnmokcwyd/mwCILa3AK3v1I9nkD4E7Da3cIE UI0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2eO7mtmn3hYQY9Vui3XNV1TqRDnTNVmH0AFjIDMD77Tscv/Agb P4wDAkzrWjc9mXl0wykKQIAg4Y1Xejph5Oxy1hoWNg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsTUOPUkqea6MXXVvm464BWGFHHYdEhhR1RqkEeRn+SGr5jxs8qx+o0umRRHRniu2W5dIXQTCphCfMXnU/Ez8w= X-Received: by 2002:a19:1c3:: with SMTP id 186mr530964lfb.88.1584472366017; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:12:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Warren Kumari Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:12:09 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Salz, Rich" Cc: Eric Rescorla , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org, " , Martin Thomson Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 19:12:52 -0000 On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 3:01 PM Salz, Rich wrote: > > There was one comment about giving too much power to the secretariat. Yes, thank you, I did see that -- I just happen to disagree. The secretariat are (currently) the group which acts like sysadmins / root for the IETF / IESG - they add and remove ADs in the DT, they can reset passwords, they verify that the process was actually followed[0], etc. > The main point of this thread is *NOT* about that, but rather making sure there's continuity by having enough people. Yup - and I think that the secretariat is the "continuity" - they are (currently) the stable group within the IEFT - ADs come and go, but the secretariat (role) remains - I'd think having 2 or 3 secretariat role accounts is better, and more secure, than having 15ADs each with a subset, and rotating them in and out. W [0]: It doesn't happen very often any more, but it used to be at least somewhat common that an AD would accidentally click the wrong dropdown in the DT, and put a document in IESG eval before IETF LC, or similar. The secretariat would smack our hands, and fix it... > > I've been told by folks who are looking at the backup requirement, that it requires an owner account (which was a surprise to me and I will verify it). > -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Tue Mar 17 12:31:17 2020 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 B08A43A0C9C for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:31:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 KptrYFwrZweB for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 BE2663A0CB3 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 12:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122333.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02HJHbY0013958 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:30:59 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=ophQIgyV2kEGEf5qg/hhdE4FDUhyugtsBoruM8Zagkc=; b=Ld+9uNuYavkJbQ2oFFDgpij/MJGhUbnGW5sdwoG1DqApmJhjQW46ay2Fxvyn++VnPpGW QMKxxLTepXPbaNg3nMuX2dQ66cezUrnCSTdMfqXBmYbJ+KgqNfipr0Z3oKBaziNVtw9g 1J1A6n/NlI0bq9u2bx4g9YpF8qKTjOsencFAQwb/YQX1G4Wo4me4LYTO9TQOQndGU141 3uJHaanDR97AVHM6j1sEhQAUI1SfRgAfxpbrW68YwE+7xUr+7S/Fj9/KKzS4zusNU268 ph31XVxnz9RtiPGFzVlJFHofHZ0ydnkzj43qKfLAwPBuSCZH6tCZaq7wdePTD8iJNJkY eA== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint6 (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [184.51.33.61] (may be forged)) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2yrva65034-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:30:59 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02HJHX6D031054 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:30:58 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.53]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrtkvawsd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:30:58 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:30:51 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:30:51 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fLpgVLWAg4aEiFanXBcfrtZKhLQTKAgAEyKwCAAKejAIAATLIA//++g4CAAEYygP//wioA Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:30:50 +0000 Message-ID: <5BB0EE61-AB74-4C3A-993F-99CB37361587@akamai.com> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.117.157] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <60107D5E6D1E39498C03CC9F7811751E@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_08:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=624 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003170074 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_08:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=607 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003170074 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 19:31:16 -0000 DQogICAgPiBUaGVyZSB3YXMgb25lIGNvbW1lbnQgYWJvdXQgZ2l2aW5nIHRvbyBtdWNoIHBvd2Vy IHRvIHRoZSBzZWNyZXRhcmlhdC4NCg0KPi4uLiBleHBsYW5hdGlvbiBmb3IgZGlzYWdyZWVtZW50 IGVsaWRlZCAuLi4NCg0KWWVzLCB3ZSBnZXQgaXQuICBUaGF0IHdhcyBteSBob3BlIHdpdGggc2F5 aW5nICJvbmUgY29tbWVudCIgICBUaGUgb25lIGNvbW1lbnQgdGhhdCB0aGV5IHNlY3JldGFyaWF0 IGdldHMgdG9vIG11Y2ggcG93ZXIgKmlzIGluIHRoZSByb3VnaC4qICBObyBuZWVkIHRvIGtlZXAg YmVhdGluZyB0aGF0IGRlYWQgaG9yc2UuDQoNClNvcnJ5IGlmIEknbSBjcmFua3kuDQoJL3IkDQog DQoNCg== From nobody Tue Mar 17 15:08:16 2020 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 B4E7C3A088A for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:07:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=mnot.net header.b=Wh4lXutu; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=W8coG6fa 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 3q4skhQQTrHZ for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:07:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CA133A0847 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:07:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B36795C01E4; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:07:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:07:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=Z gFx9+XhCQVKExVefbt/nEkl2Ar6f+06LpGAKsr6dxY=; b=Wh4lXutuwS/RpqcHi XCVdtaqHrIjK1FMpDiOVjTcET/ZFtwOEuitV5/SMcqTGZzNjkV7a/YrkVKK5jbLm yJzkTAHBbm7LrmMseTOUYpeN/UfUDbckJdQQWlrkXVOr/8MtPIccaK4w+BfEwuCX s00RYAYoAK3cESHRNBqT2/ilVQWjkCjsBteSRscyfUfLD0WYljKoMgAcRLLy3b6X hnQxWZvkCSMT3pf7N9aa2/LkJR2GG/7ZR1OwZfc8ZRZr3jFfrOzAttMIegVvO5fO fkpzxm1YgT4UAYZYnnuCrkXX5yNxMWTBi+16iZMU8GnmnMJCYOEHYRX2jt80gInZ NVE1A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=ZgFx9+XhCQVKExVefbt/nEkl2Ar6f+06LpGAKsr6d xY=; b=W8coG6fa8uyDQos9bkQ34KTheQMwMzW6+s+9jOoxH0iQj4Idi9/wMmnXz vbMi6W/iGVWeNhWz7rf7sxNEfV6nXG5GL3ScaGtdusHYHG3aHDPPPzbpcTcokccJ PhgqoEDibFvgoBiYcL0Vhz10jBm0yASsK1DxY/p2opdHqd5IWzK/eT6AFZD/nWsQ 8zZdG+BQ7HhzZnL3aMgVjcsNrc1CyrFIh3dQyO6XCCkaIZQQxSm/Z9suV1aJo2V3 UInCk3/OboQu5kpL7GMqnhzTFAYDsn2le+ZbhsK5nsS9qdhFos6rhRL1TrMdp+RG rtGberI9l8Cnwo1ownT6t4YdrLfBg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefhedgudeglecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghr khcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrih hnpehivghtfhdrohhrghdpmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppeduudelrddujedrudehkedr vdehudenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpe hmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 72FA2306218B; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:07:48 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:07:45 +1100 Cc: Eric Rescorla , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "Salz, Rich" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , Martin Thomson Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5C3FC4C6-8E70-4EAB-9586-1BABBA823020@mnot.net> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> To: Warren Kumari X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 22:08:14 -0000 Let's make sure we have a good chat with the Secretariat about 2FA and = storing credentials, ok? > On 18 Mar 2020, at 5:55 am, Warren Kumari wrote: >=20 > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:22 AM Eric Rescorla wrote: >>=20 >> Hi folks, >>=20 >> I think it's a mistake to overindex on trying to minimize the power = of the secretariat here. Remember that these are just tools we use to = develop our drafts and the secretariat *already* controls the tools we = use to do our official work (the mailing list, drafts repo, data = tracker). For that reason, I believe having them do this work as much as = practical increases our overall efficiency without incurring undue risk. >=20 > On principle I avoid agreeing with Ekr -- but in this case he's > completely right :-) Anyone who believes that the IESG / ADs run > anything is, sadly, mistaken - the secretariat is the actual power > behind the throne, and ADs are largely figureheads (ok, not really, > but fairly close) - the secretariat runs basically all of the tooling, > and has access to everything - when an AD wants a document to enter > IETF LC, they click a button which triggers the secretariat to > actually *do* $magic. When an AD wants a document to show up on the > telechat, they click a button - and it's the secretariat who actually > schedules it. After balloting, it's the AD who says "Great, approved" > - and then the secretariat who says "I think you mean *after* the > DISCUSSes are cleared, right? Right?!". I think that having Org owned > by the secretariat, and having them add and remove ADs as people roll > in and out makes much more sense than having ADs own anything. Alexey > is finishing his term, and will be replated - having the secretariat > handle this seems like a much better solution than having the ADs swap > people in and out... >=20 > W >=20 >>=20 >> -Ekr >>=20 >>=20 >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:21 PM Martin Thomson = wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 01:04, Salz, Rich wrote: >>>> In the cases I'm familiar with, we have 2+ AD's and 2 WG chairs. I >>>> think that's enough redundancy. >>>=20 >>> I agree. Though I think that if we are to set a hard limit, then it = should be 2, not more. Obviously, with the number of potential owners, = we could have more. Here is where I'm at right now: >>>=20 >>>> GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner. = The owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area = Directors and SHOULD include Area Directors from the area and the IETF = Secretariat. Area Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes = an owner. Working Group chairs MAY also be owners. An organization MUST = have at least 2 owners. >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ietf-and-github mailing list >>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-and-github mailing list >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > idea in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > of pants. > ---maf >=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 Mar 17 15:16:54 2020 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 7676C3A08FA for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:16:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 FzXE8ghWnlbg for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:16:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppa2.lax.icann.org (ppa2.lax.icann.org [192.0.33.77]) (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 7E60F3A08FF for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:16:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from PFE112-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (out.west.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.7]) by ppa2.lax.icann.org (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with ESMTPS id 02HMGRah026204 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 22:16:27 GMT Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-2.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:16:25 -0700 Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:16:25 -0700 From: Paul Hoffman To: Mark Nottingham CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," Thread-Topic: [Ext] [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV/Kmy0JpCxAPFbEyE2+TjG37ctQ== Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 22:16:25 +0000 Message-ID: <552EC088-C882-41C1-8B9C-DCF7FA348900@icann.org> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <5C3FC4C6-8E70-4EAB-9586-1BABBA823020@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <5C3FC4C6-8E70-4EAB-9586-1BABBA823020@mnot.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234] x-source-routing-agent: Processed Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5B6AFF90-955D-4640-83F1-2E340E9D417D"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-17_09:2020-03-17, 2020-03-17 signatures=0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Ext] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 17 Mar 2020 22:16:52 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5B6AFF90-955D-4640-83F1-2E340E9D417D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mar 17, 2020, at 3:07 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >=20 > Let's make sure we have a good chat with the Secretariat about 2FA and = storing credentials, ok? >=20 Maybe not as part of this draft, though. That's a bigger issue than just = for WGs. --Paul Hoffman= --Apple-Mail=_5B6AFF90-955D-4640-83F1-2E340E9D417D Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExDzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFADCABgkqhkiG9w0BBwEAAKCCC/Qw ggWeMIIEhqADAgECAhAG83jiXlqePPrfwUUEH4ZnMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAMGUxCzAJBgNVBAYT AlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20xJDAi BgNVBAMTG0RpZ2lDZXJ0IFNIQTIgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBDQTAeFw0xODA2MTMwMDAwMDBaFw0yMTA2 MTMxMjAwMDBaMIG9MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzETMBEGA1UECBMKQ2FsaWZvcm5pYTEUMBIGA1UEBxML TG9zIEFuZ2VsZXMxPDA6BgNVBAoTM0ludGVybmV0IENvcnBvcmF0aW9uIGZvciBBc3NpZ25lZCBO YW1lcyBhbmQgTnVtYmVyczEeMBwGA1UEAxMVUGF1bCBIb2ZmbWFuIDIwMTgwNjEzMSUwIwYJKoZI hvcNAQkBFhZwYXVsLmhvZmZtYW5AaWNhbm4ub3JnMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIB CgKCAQEArTbxBbfxbk1VxDQsOmEm14Yta2AE5cBcJ/ktMkC+aQrTCMSXrQJfjiMUUndnfAT1DWcf jg706vvITa1lkFaLoF9b6cNICMKsibFruFy8ZA2bsIPRXPPzSsY6zibdStNCpruNTQoiL9bIxlQp qRUx/BfvHAhS7g5dAOcRgkpW9Q4Si5bl6A2qS0ImIMzktNcVxrWAn0HsG9u8cKcSCBJxavRAnMt/ XhE7tCICjyoeoprYZ2ztmdZUL6UgMNrDz/KoeNHAWzTAH45hn1Jz1IguGLM/M2Vb8mF8eP3wAh4p MVIi2jCwNqC497R8x0lsNryoG+uy/26nK6fhCTqVfF6hgQIDAQABo4IB7zCCAeswHwYDVR0jBBgw FoAU5wIjgABP2Ne8lAvZP3Q5STI8inkwHQYDVR0OBBYEFD+ST5hEHbTuHJZT9husDN7VLQdgMAwG A1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwIQYDVR0RBBowGIEWcGF1bC5ob2ZmbWFuQGljYW5uLm9yZzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8E BAMCBaAwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMEMGA1UdIAQ8MDowOAYKYIZIAYb9 bAQBAjAqMCgGCCsGAQUFBwIBFhxodHRwczovL3d3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vQ1BTMIGIBgNVHR8E gYAwfjA9oDugOYY3aHR0cDovL2NybDMuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0RpZ2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFzc3VyZWRJ RENBLWcyLmNybDA9oDugOYY3aHR0cDovL2NybDQuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0RpZ2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFz c3VyZWRJRENBLWcyLmNybDB5BggrBgEFBQcBAQRtMGswJAYIKwYBBQUHMAGGGGh0dHA6Ly9vY3Nw LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTBDBggrBgEFBQcwAoY3aHR0cDovL2NhY2VydHMuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0Rp Z2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFzc3VyZWRJRENBLmNydDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFAAOCAQEAA7vGiITVJvEIgFN3 UVszD4nyt8ks8d/Ik5Uj1jPuD8+NX4lBpDOIvfYkCn8KYSrx+sMQrpoS2enbOMwekef3tObl2hVK 2Q+tv1GksPq9tQ98Ab1Odv1IM9aYaU1alR5/EEhc0uqs1Ulz2WUc8x/anf3/IpbHyEPdOCLiL9mi b4GDM8z9mqvAE+MtisqRs2+wlMzC/63sNKpA6KdfBNKMLHnyqCAKF7luGWp612yPmGoh63bBLrpR JQorI/fsv5SE2pK3Xf53W/ELf6sxWMsXm9iEgMeoAOtDeJHrv+i+vlldwHHJK6zlXIdVrjxRklyg ISXmlsdHs/sDp1MEqZTOXDCCBk4wggU2oAMCAQICEASueWBmZpAaucV/pmxb3M0wDQYJKoZIhvcN AQELBQAwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3 LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBSb290IENBMB4XDTEz MTEwNTEyMDAwMFoXDTI4MTEwNTEyMDAwMFowZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lD ZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgU0hB MiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA3PgRIz9qte/A J3kbLQWHohBDMd8O1BUbT3ekIs4+jHDwvgeO3ScqvAEdtiwKyt1pWB9B7WoFH9pjeFkeIiwr+Lp+ yTU7VvEffEJ+JbAjGcZFONc9RPkgfGCuHLBaGAS+jzv3qfCUmqYMY0m2QRdTQDK9T+ZQelAfJUXo 8Ymvzf9e/1Dz8BcR/73FifW9YrnY+45FBIVtmc3FSE39JqsCNkXqNtdfauIagkEK3OnZ9ZEXjsYh rTg8E+Yef2ac1U3ZRtr2z1KnfTskw7TBUTXGm+vU737kewPhRL16CzfgT8uCig1xGOSm4IksG/Oy czzBsJKeGH29q33FfQihLMKfcwIDAQABo4IC+DCCAvQwEgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB/wIBADAOBgNV HQ8BAf8EBAMCAYYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEKDAmMCQGCCsGAQUFBzABhhhodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5kaWdp Y2VydC5jb20wgYEGA1UdHwR6MHgwOqA4oDaGNGh0dHA6Ly9jcmw0LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9EaWdp Q2VydEFzc3VyZWRJRFJvb3RDQS5jcmwwOqA4oDaGNGh0dHA6Ly9jcmwzLmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9E aWdpQ2VydEFzc3VyZWRJRFJvb3RDQS5jcmwwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwME MIIBswYDVR0gBIIBqjCCAaYwggGiBgpghkgBhv1sAAIEMIIBkjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cHM6 Ly93d3cuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0NQUzCCAWQGCCsGAQUFBwICMIIBVh6CAVIAQQBuAHkAIAB1AHMA ZQAgAG8AZgAgAHQAaABpAHMAIABDAGUAcgB0AGkAZgBpAGMAYQB0AGUAIABjAG8AbgBzAHQAaQB0 AHUAdABlAHMAIABhAGMAYwBlAHAAdABhAG4AYwBlACAAbwBmACAAdABoAGUAIABEAGkAZwBpAEMA ZQByAHQAIABDAFAALwBDAFAAUwAgAGEAbgBkACAAdABoAGUAIABSAGUAbAB5AGkAbgBnACAAUABh AHIAdAB5ACAAQQBnAHIAZQBlAG0AZQBuAHQAIAB3AGgAaQBjAGgAIABsAGkAbQBpAHQAIABsAGkA YQBiAGkAbABpAHQAeQAgAGEAbgBkACAAYQByAGUAIABpAG4AYwBvAHIAcABvAHIAYQB0AGUAZAAg AGgAZQByAGUAaQBuACAAYgB5ACAAcgBlAGYAZQByAGUAbgBjAGUALjAdBgNVHQ4EFgQU5wIjgABP 2Ne8lAvZP3Q5STI8inkwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUReuir/SSy4IxLVGLp6chnfNtyA8wDQYJKoZIhvcN AQELBQADggEBAE7UiSe5/R2Hd34PKAWQ8QovyTs+vZOckMav+pFRhzJUa+jKwXFRXJmOtfrgYhmZ pgeafBMn2+UCooQS2RX2CkRXxDSPbXMfOtagAT3e44LkRWuy6yX9gF4dOZC+W0L2zpFg4/mgVgxI EM4zaHvNk6vwastPWA+5e10bBIGepyLiV0kn7pKTCL5pCFMCOi5dyBn0UIBOAtmwXZG0k4f5lpaB VUCOZu2C2LsoX+1MYe0GWCgZUxFEvEcgKbIEbNiJVJk7ddtneCweknjGVT1YEhEybr1DDE0023vG QtvsvqubYUwGkuOO3yEqUFcEwGCiNdUknmY3CUnP1fhls+DibsIxggMpMIIDJQIBATB5MGUxCzAJ BgNVBAYTAlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5j b20xJDAiBgNVBAMTG0RpZ2lDZXJ0IFNIQTIgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBDQQIQBvN44l5anjz638FFBB+G ZzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFAKCCAYEwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0B CQUxDxcNMjAwMzE3MjIxNjI1WjAvBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxIgQg4Z6f2VMmkxhFeaEF0EqNH8UmKcOC tJeYdgqUS2DdZ9wwgYgGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDF7MHkwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERp Z2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQg U0hBMiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBAhAG83jiXlqePPrfwUUEH4ZnMIGKBgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzF7oHkw ZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2lj ZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgU0hBMiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBAhAG83jiXlqePPrf wUUEH4ZnMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIBAJztc/edUn37C28VTblUu9/9jqVHLlOzAKGdKWimEgZt 8YVrNU/o4LUKAm5xsbNRIAO7feD9eFAn7C4eaGqLrIrke6gOOFfrbilZMnwgolE7K730Eu+P51BQ 8LlgbuuExCYm6ZpOdtg22ZR2rdKlRmWng7BUBm3dbSjIviDWWFPMqSORNiRYoGpoQ/yWhoHciXne iozCIuAQtwUGulvsv3HajGNYPSs4ZZ5ScolyXraFLmWlkjVvGbSzcWKEPa2Q8k/87sqPOVzXxPyy uo4+JUHR6+hNBAQYttnITXdIjByqRgSDTKMJEfP1KkJ2L88UTAOWZejr1WEYmlHvyOvwIdQAAAAA AAA= --Apple-Mail=_5B6AFF90-955D-4640-83F1-2E340E9D417D-- From nobody Wed Mar 18 04:03:43 2020 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 AFE203A13CE for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 04:03:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.895 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 XHU2ulDaQYxX for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 04:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi (vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi [62.142.117.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F4543A13BB for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 04:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 004E920EF5; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 13:03:21 +0200 (EET) Received: from gw01.mail.saunalahti.fi (gw01.mail.saunalahti.fi [195.197.172.115]) by vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8C2520E5F; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 13:03:20 +0200 (EET) Received: from eggert.org (unknown [62.248.255.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: eggert@elisanet.fi) by gw01.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0FE2540003; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 13:03:13 +0200 (EET) Received: from stickers.eggert.org (stickers.eggert.org [172.24.110.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 35A001D6F04; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 13:03:06 +0200 (EET) From: Lars Eggert Message-Id: <2F91A8A6-44A4-44DF-8DBD-3319E2C7F14A@eggert.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_926151F8-86FB-4F73-A247-E3D69D33C018"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 13:03:05 +0200 In-Reply-To: Cc: Eric Rescorla , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "Salz, Rich" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , Martin Thomson To: Warren Kumari References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> X-MailScanner-ID: 35A001D6F04.A212B X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 11:03:42 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_926151F8-86FB-4F73-A247-E3D69D33C018 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 2020-3-17, at 20:55, Warren Kumari wrote: > I think that having Org owned > by the secretariat, and having them add and remove ADs as people roll > in and out makes much more sense than having ADs own anything. +1 I'll note that the secretariat does this already by granting and = removing AD datatracker privileges. Lars --Apple-Mail=_926151F8-86FB-4F73-A247-E3D69D33C018 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----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAl5x/+kACgkQVLXDCb9w wVdpkg/9FyXPiHgNXa3gxEz97+cOnsx/kWkSswSwQ+dUUQPQLrAEqZytbc+vcAdz TQkSDI+/fMW8HuAfy0ZquwuSAmknJdnK+S78BvYBtOn8tfl5rpnFFNGSPrNgs5FN dHNdzyo5WbmELOp5ijQWczNku4sZCllcTOcAykBRLsKvyLL+ZhMYU1RdGs13LLh7 DalckQqijFCVIxHpCLhuSY4tmdlm4Qh7cjUEAhyjg7QCk8jpO+yhpJL5gBVI/I2F TX1j8t+h2zhoZlsXTdf5xwEwXwZd4TvVDYr9fnL3hRINFytJ2JCZTxJHEPE6mY69 Xruamie4MnPhpsfLsuMolNf7dyv6jRKFbF8S1+JjariiWL3rIs1AXBTVgO38/RG+ kKjQSbhuZxyvY6GqlHUpGWZV4HkfGOHZ9M+Zi7dVOmP32L19Ac+BWpsDghQxxiNg dxDS+37HN6/8KFja6+MB7+oRbnN6wGvT5u6oWOR+Q7JfX05sk1CT/pL3cKW3x/JA DL0CBWF8jj+JNAybKx4PTyVTmRFIq+eLTjWVrWPs5oVnRnhY82GkjI5MGH7eF2Kl Uo51jJChxsu8XN8J/+QW1mYKIdzqH0zbAFokJvuckXZ4z2sRR9SpY5ixKOtsHVuG C2GoNgas6StREu1aFEWzwY3w//++ZI/ccO2ZVQWvtnFq1UupAG8= =ZoXd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_926151F8-86FB-4F73-A247-E3D69D33C018-- From nobody Wed Mar 18 05:52:32 2020 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 C2B363A1547 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 05:52:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=amuMxlhV; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=oGoAtDTR 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 4zvKjbaqM7-g for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 05:52:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCEE83A1522 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 05:52:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3174; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584535931; x=1585745531; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=YXBxQnp6J/dxbY3Kz4bEExTBg9mgkLQ1PFIVc6w4H4I=; b=amuMxlhV+wohh59ocFn4yxwMyNbZdQ+g00rURbbewJh3fR+fZ5ysH6kv lYKuXLfgJJHary4n6MrspYuNJISjRIFLE0KzlMzQosmDr1UQv6frp0b+7 D/v5UTnkGt0V0UrH011BhJOY+qp7/ATGK3FOnY3tG/eHF9M3dkr2GnHBh s=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AxoEWKx+dfp0isv9uRHGN82YQeigqvan1NQcJ65?= =?us-ascii?q?0hzqhDabmn44+8ZB7E/fs4iljPUM2b8P9Ch+fM+4HYEW0bqdfk0jgZdYBUER?= =?us-ascii?q?oMiMEYhQslVdSaCEnnK/jCZC0hF8MEX1hgrDm2?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CcBQCWGHJe/4gNJK1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFgUQgBAsqCoQMg0UDinKCX5gYgUKBEANUCQEBAQwBAS0?= =?us-ascii?q?CBAEBhEMCF4F+JDgTAgMBAQsBAQUBAQECAQUEbYVWDIVjAQEBAQMSEREMAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?3AQsEAgEIEQQBAQECAhEVAgICMBUICAIEDgUIGoVPAy4BA6J6AoE5iC01dYE?= =?us-ascii?q?ygn8BAQWFABiCDAmBDiqMLhqBQT+BEUeCTT6EBAEHIQUbPYJSMoIskHKfUwq?= =?us-ascii?q?CPJcVm0mPBptfAgQCBAUCDgEBBYFpIoFEDAhwFTuCbFAYDY4dDBeDUIpVdIE?= =?us-ascii?q?pjRwBgQ8BAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,567,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="740246521" Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 18 Mar 2020 12:52:10 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (xch-rcd-004.cisco.com [173.37.102.14]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02ICqAqU013318 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:52:10 GMT Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (173.37.102.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:52:09 -0500 Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 08:52:09 -0400 Received: from NAM04-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:52:09 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=CyDaLMwcZcEPjHqI9rctLwbJRJJbcgsF5CwJA4IMj/WWZPUeTbwWUZ1AXWZ0ThzKNGaNA1a2CvirCRJS3gpwi3PmJn6zZQEXLvk+Kj/cVtnc6NyMneUzRK8RbUR6Pi062KpiGExV13a4HP22ZkkXlCbgLfmMVahQACMwetc2QkyacGUg+dIGO2DQzEyB9kVgjJiBg3Sx+KnpAZw42BHAx6wPmMlAn02Gxjp15heTTTlzOEvPpJRNFrKZGO1cop/LUMhZfgAVOcHWUzDvEdEcKHt/o00cUKD0eXinQU8gLZegJ+w8jWZHYEsgmQqZmxJTJBexVCcnI9Dgow1cD0xPDg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=YXBxQnp6J/dxbY3Kz4bEExTBg9mgkLQ1PFIVc6w4H4I=; b=W1Ai0yWnEeQ+O7+3+v8YSABQ949zo0LxxXFUno0q3g6+UEBsXXGklKdIg9hjmutny8ke/4mUn60zocNb58oS1D0Dpwhb5Qd6dVD6AKAM40s75O6Utifb6XxgsUZbGHQ43+brfyQx7TmiH/2DNV0ZDe3gvxlOAVoFikZxLJvYKx4zvua1eT+qHaXqELPjq1YbYnkRwWky6Ib8W3rFotNGrbjvtfhKM8ayCLV2umBdfxWsCmIfoLwIzIF4XU8Qf7XOcNPYakyL5zwE1dEIw/KoLhspuBrLMeweSKznc7yOZ0MkCXXej69Au5kV1jwLOE8qg8kSpGJxzyvOq8A/SOUB5A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=YXBxQnp6J/dxbY3Kz4bEExTBg9mgkLQ1PFIVc6w4H4I=; b=oGoAtDTRmUFx/d0Niw9f3hQn73zsaQ4GYg/+vKUpY3tlnyEBO7InOF9vq6TF8rvqfzzkQGQSS82UtpohykAUzO1nNv+wSz9PmSXL4lImuq4ldAlA70GgvQ9PArhrw5yeQm43J1Th3tanFlKAdGd0gX5GMUGAEvlWLlW0nsa0Q3U= Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:190::17) by MN2PR11MB3616.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:ed::15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.22; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:52:08 +0000 Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2835.017; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:52:08 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: Warren Kumari , "Salz, Rich" CC: Eric Rescorla , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fVOrEs0dx38kq7fR7QMBYfoahLQTKAgADvHQCAAKejAIAATLIAgAABkYCAAAMkgIABJvsw Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:52:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [82.15.79.32] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c910ad6b-370d-44d6-ec21-08d7cb3b2af9 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3616: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 03468CBA43 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(346002)(136003)(396003)(199004)(26005)(186003)(9686003)(86362001)(316002)(5660300002)(55016002)(52536014)(478600001)(71200400001)(54906003)(110136005)(4326008)(76116006)(66446008)(64756008)(66556008)(66476007)(2906002)(81156014)(66946007)(81166006)(33656002)(6506007)(8676002)(53546011)(7696005)(8936002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB3616; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: iUNSROxajRwjjDbRiR8lWpNyLk8FN5cb/W++f71LEOMQCjiLhCggdiTbepi95I+ZRf/fl6tcPMsY7NwlWefaY+ZJi4TeXo4/VP7OfrhZJFvmrEAwNX0OfeStgiN1rhmn3sf1HleuieeozbMoF/2LuCfrhDj87Z1+Fm69en1WqjlmTexDsuTy+ndDSb9ll/cni1n9q9zfhGuhrttWXa6Xot8B4l7hlTaKNfRWFmZ4tFZOgK0mpnwWkqFssNZHZmr1wN4AMziriRWJXgrCMWHCTTiMuYDWGkHTEqK3Pl0aFBvpbw2XrHHKRHDmpVLmGRvdE8YUl9jacZzcbateR7C534RA3E/EY5EyOluKCxhom9j+DmlxzBUoVqIEAyXDLwb5ngF5tyqCLI6zdDOp2uts+qQP1CvqV/UZoNrFS8ZBxg0rDpLcOFV1t60ZBPn4eGo6 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: wUiMnEc/16MoYDx+s/kBdPR1R+AFJV5/RSlRcp2VDki5W7OIyJv/i9fmiDD00KEbskUQ9N5RkRTvYDdE0M8iasciV2VM4rfLq/zfv8/zHdoiPRaii2ropFcjk0HwYS/xrvu7eRL1zNyBbfiRMfsLIA== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c910ad6b-370d-44d6-ec21-08d7cb3b2af9 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 18 Mar 2020 12:52:07.9076 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: OOA7C/LiKToRG8jgADYJ6Jl4o6yRAKPAPBDDQBXMI+/udNoeDro5qiXHRaIXvcN3tNoQTn10YQYRjx8+hUcpEA== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3616 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.14, xch-rcd-004.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-3.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 12:52:31 -0000 SWYgdGhlIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBpcyB0aGF0IGl0IGlzIG9rYXkgZm9yIHRoZSBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCB0 byBiZSBvd25lciBvZiBhbGwgb2YgdGhlIFdHIHJlcG9zLCB0aGVuIEkgc3VnZ2VzdCB0aGUgbGlz dCBvZiBvd25lcnMgYmU6DQogTVVTVCBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCAmIFJlc3BvbnNpYmxlIEFEICh3aGlj aCBhdXRvbWF0aWNhbGx5IGVuZm9yY2VzIGEgbWluaW11bSBvZiAyKQ0KIE1BWSBXRyBjaGFpcnMg JiBvdGhlciBBRHMgZm9yIHRoZSBhcmVhLg0KDQpSZWdhcmRzLA0KUm9iDQoNCg0KPiAtLS0tLU9y aWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiBGcm9tOiBXYXJyZW4gS3VtYXJpIDx3YXJyZW5Aa3VtYXJp Lm5ldD4NCj4gU2VudDogMTcgTWFyY2ggMjAyMCAxOToxMg0KPiBUbzogU2FseiwgUmljaCA8cnNh bHpAYWthbWFpLmNvbT4NCj4gQ2M6IEVyaWMgUmVzY29ybGEgPGVrckBydGZtLmNvbT47IFJvYiBX aWx0b24gKHJ3aWx0b24pDQo+IDxyd2lsdG9uQGNpc2NvLmNvbT47IGlldGYtYW5kLWdpdGh1YkBp ZXRmLm9yZywgPGlldGYtYW5kLWdpdGh1YkBpZXRmLm9yZz47DQo+IE1hcnRpbiBUaG9tc29uIDxt dEBsb3dlbnRyb3B5Lm5ldD4NCj4gU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtJZXRmLWFuZC1naXRodWJdIFJ1bGVz IHJlZ2FyZGluZyBvd25lcnNoaXAgb2Ygb3Jncw0KPiANCj4gT24gVHVlLCBNYXIgMTcsIDIwMjAg YXQgMzowMSBQTSBTYWx6LCBSaWNoIDxyc2FsekBha2FtYWkuY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCj4gPg0KPiA+ IFRoZXJlIHdhcyBvbmUgY29tbWVudCBhYm91dCBnaXZpbmcgdG9vIG11Y2ggcG93ZXIgdG8gdGhl IHNlY3JldGFyaWF0Lg0KPiANCj4gWWVzLCB0aGFuayB5b3UsIEkgZGlkIHNlZSB0aGF0IC0tIEkg anVzdCBoYXBwZW4gdG8gZGlzYWdyZWUuIFRoZQ0KPiBzZWNyZXRhcmlhdCBhcmUgKGN1cnJlbnRs eSkgdGhlIGdyb3VwIHdoaWNoIGFjdHMgbGlrZSBzeXNhZG1pbnMgLyByb290IGZvcg0KPiB0aGUg SUVURiAvIElFU0cgLSB0aGV5IGFkZCBhbmQgcmVtb3ZlIEFEcyBpbiB0aGUgRFQsIHRoZXkgY2Fu IHJlc2V0DQo+IHBhc3N3b3JkcywgdGhleSB2ZXJpZnkgdGhhdCB0aGUgcHJvY2VzcyB3YXMgYWN0 dWFsbHkgZm9sbG93ZWRbMF0sIGV0Yy4NCj4gDQo+ID4gVGhlIG1haW4gcG9pbnQgb2YgdGhpcyB0 aHJlYWQgaXMgKk5PVCogYWJvdXQgdGhhdCwgYnV0IHJhdGhlciBtYWtpbmcNCj4gc3VyZSB0aGVy ZSdzIGNvbnRpbnVpdHkgYnkgaGF2aW5nIGVub3VnaCBwZW9wbGUuDQo+IA0KPiBZdXAgLSBhbmQg SSB0aGluayB0aGF0IHRoZSBzZWNyZXRhcmlhdCBpcyB0aGUgImNvbnRpbnVpdHkiIC0gdGhleSBh cmUNCj4gKGN1cnJlbnRseSkgdGhlIHN0YWJsZSBncm91cCB3aXRoaW4gdGhlIElFRlQgLSBBRHMg Y29tZSBhbmQgZ28sIGJ1dCB0aGUNCj4gc2VjcmV0YXJpYXQgKHJvbGUpIHJlbWFpbnMgLSBJJ2Qg dGhpbmsgaGF2aW5nIDIgb3IgMyBzZWNyZXRhcmlhdCByb2xlDQo+IGFjY291bnRzIGlzIGJldHRl ciwgYW5kIG1vcmUgc2VjdXJlLCB0aGFuIGhhdmluZyAxNUFEcyBlYWNoIHdpdGggYSBzdWJzZXQs DQo+IGFuZCByb3RhdGluZyB0aGVtIGluIGFuZCBvdXQuDQo+IFcNCj4gWzBdOiBJdCBkb2Vzbid0 IGhhcHBlbiB2ZXJ5IG9mdGVuIGFueSBtb3JlLCBidXQgaXQgdXNlZCB0byBiZSBhdCBsZWFzdA0K PiBzb21ld2hhdCBjb21tb24gdGhhdCBhbiBBRCB3b3VsZCBhY2NpZGVudGFsbHkgY2xpY2sgdGhl IHdyb25nIGRyb3Bkb3duIGluDQo+IHRoZSBEVCwgYW5kIHB1dCBhIGRvY3VtZW50IGluIElFU0cg ZXZhbCBiZWZvcmUgSUVURiBMQywgb3Igc2ltaWxhci4NCj4gVGhlIHNlY3JldGFyaWF0IHdvdWxk IHNtYWNrIG91ciBoYW5kcywgYW5kIGZpeCBpdC4uLg0KPiANCj4gPg0KPiA+IEkndmUgYmVlbiB0 b2xkIGJ5IGZvbGtzIHdobyBhcmUgbG9va2luZyBhdCB0aGUgYmFja3VwIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50LCB0 aGF0DQo+IGl0IHJlcXVpcmVzIGFuIG93bmVyIGFjY291bnQgKHdoaWNoIHdhcyBhIHN1cnByaXNl IHRvIG1lIGFuZCBJIHdpbGwgdmVyaWZ5DQo+IGl0KS4NCj4gPg0KPiANCj4gDQo+IC0tDQo+IEkg ZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgdGhlIGV4ZWN1dGlvbiBpcyByZWxldmFudCB3aGVuIGl0IHdhcyBvYnZpb3Vz bHkgYSBiYWQgaWRlYQ0KPiBpbiB0aGUgZmlyc3QgcGxhY2UuDQo+IFRoaXMgaXMgbGlrZSBwdXR0 aW5nIHJhYmlkIHdlYXNlbHMgaW4geW91ciBwYW50cywgYW5kIGxhdGVyIGV4cHJlc3NpbmcNCj4g cmVncmV0IGF0IGhhdmluZyBjaG9zZW4gdGhvc2UgcGFydGljdWxhciByYWJpZCB3ZWFzZWxzIGFu ZCB0aGF0IHBhaXIgb2YNCj4gcGFudHMuDQo+ICAgIC0tLW1hZg0K From nobody Wed Mar 18 07:43:54 2020 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 7AFD03A16D0 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:43:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 gCAD4nJnaACP for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 790B93A168A for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122333.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02IEhjLo022154; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:43:49 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=WrC5O9v39o46SCapenVu1nytLtEfy4YKM8Mxc6Boc48=; b=EMCTCzR0QpvfceNk29dLtYFDc4HiymKKXWWlzX83c380XaPy5RGZBLX+WL3+zUVVHpdA VDjJdZlgV/QmWTXyoXNqv0bVzby8A1NFQuY1VEKz2zRqmkotR7s8AaBg52oaxJfiydIw H/QmnP6KWAFluYt8FDl9LcQUl4amajpfT13HrufWrXnJstMVzyBH5vSOxL1r6c/WO7xt 2YNvVXSRgf61UCmgL3kXt6aLYSp5L+AVhyUZ0r+7YaLhr+cz7A1T9VpErpURMg6OyDDs WxGucuPhr9JCldUp4Dc/pedcQU3Ie8MU1enxVRyEOnjk8fPbOlX5Bon53ZGCKJF+cDMD Dg== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint8 (prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com [96.6.114.122] (may be forged)) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2yrva68m0s-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:43:49 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02IEWJHI009085; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:43:48 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.53]) by prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrtkwkch0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:43:48 -0400 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 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:43:47 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:43:47 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , Warren Kumari CC: Eric Rescorla , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fLpgVLWAg4aEiFanXBcfrtZKhLQTKAgAEyKwCAAKejAIAATLIA//++g4CAAEYygIABKCeA///cIwA= Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:43:46 +0000 Message-ID: <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.118.63] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-18_06:2020-03-18, 2020-03-18 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=957 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003180070 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-18_06:2020-03-18, 2020-03-18 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=921 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003180071 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 14:43:53 -0000 PiAgICBJZiB0aGUgY29uc2Vuc3VzIGlzIHRoYXQgaXQgaXMgb2theSBmb3IgdGhlIFNlY3JldGFy aWF0IHRvIGJlIG93bmVyIG9mIGFsbCBvZiB0aGUgV0cgcmVwb3MsIHRoZW4gSSBzdWdnZXN0IHRo ZSBsaXN0IG9mIG93bmVycyBiZToNCiAgICAgTVVTVCBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCAmIFJlc3BvbnNpYmxl IEFEICh3aGljaCBhdXRvbWF0aWNhbGx5IGVuZm9yY2VzIGEgbWluaW11bSBvZiAyKQ0KICAgICBN QVkgV0cgY2hhaXJzICYgb3RoZXIgQURzIGZvciB0aGUgYXJlYS4NCiAgDQpUaGlzIHdpbGwgbm90 IHdvcmsgYmVjYXVzZSB0aGUgV0cgY2hhaXJzLCBhcyBvd25lcnMsIHdpbGwgbmVlZCB0byBkbyB0 aGUgZGF5LXRvLWRheSB0aGluZ3MgbGlrZSBjcmVhdGluZyByZXBvJ3MgZm9yIEktRCdzLCBjcmVh dGluZyB0ZWFtcyBmb3IgdGhvc2UgSS1EJ3MsIGV0Yy4NCg0KSSB2aWV3IHRoZSBBRCBhcyBhIGJh Y2t1cC4gIE1hbnkgV0cgY2hhaXJzIGhhdmUgbG9uZ2VyIHRlbnVyZSB0aGFuIHRoZSBBRCB3aG8g aXMgcmVzcG9uc2libGUuIA0KDQo= From nobody Wed Mar 18 07:58:19 2020 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 7521B3A16FF for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:58:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 wd1Osn-pKreb for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:58:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppa3.lax.icann.org (ppa3.lax.icann.org [192.0.33.78]) (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 4E4ED3A16FE for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:58:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from PFE112-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (out.west.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.7]) by ppa3.lax.icann.org (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with ESMTPS id 02IEwF1n025871 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:58:15 GMT Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:58:13 -0700 Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 07:58:13 -0700 From: Paul Hoffman To: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," Thread-Topic: [Ext] [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV/SQ8B8S1EAuxrEGnPeJynFYnk6hO4lEAgAAECoA= Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:58:13 +0000 Message-ID: <60EE490F-082F-4198-8E73-64EB8C4D04C2@icann.org> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234] x-source-routing-agent: Processed Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B1379DD6-F298-4DB1-854F-E516A378A593"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-18_06:2020-03-18, 2020-03-18 signatures=0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] [Ext] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 14:58:18 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_B1379DD6-F298-4DB1-854F-E516A378A593 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mar 18, 2020, at 7:43 AM, Salz, Rich = wrote: >=20 >> If the consensus is that it is okay for the Secretariat to be owner = of all of the WG repos, then I suggest the list of owners be: > MUST Secretariat & Responsible AD (which automatically enforces a = minimum of 2) > MAY WG chairs & other ADs for the area. >=20 > This will not work because the WG chairs, as owners, will need to do = the day-to-day things like creating repo's for I-D's, creating teams for = those I-D's, etc. >=20 > I view the AD as a backup. Many WG chairs have longer tenure than the = AD who is responsible.=20 I agree with Rich here. The ownership should be by those who = will do the work, and the Secretariat for ultimate responsibility. --Paul Hoffman= --Apple-Mail=_B1379DD6-F298-4DB1-854F-E516A378A593 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExDzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFADCABgkqhkiG9w0BBwEAAKCCC/Qw ggWeMIIEhqADAgECAhAG83jiXlqePPrfwUUEH4ZnMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAMGUxCzAJBgNVBAYT AlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20xJDAi BgNVBAMTG0RpZ2lDZXJ0IFNIQTIgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBDQTAeFw0xODA2MTMwMDAwMDBaFw0yMTA2 MTMxMjAwMDBaMIG9MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzETMBEGA1UECBMKQ2FsaWZvcm5pYTEUMBIGA1UEBxML TG9zIEFuZ2VsZXMxPDA6BgNVBAoTM0ludGVybmV0IENvcnBvcmF0aW9uIGZvciBBc3NpZ25lZCBO YW1lcyBhbmQgTnVtYmVyczEeMBwGA1UEAxMVUGF1bCBIb2ZmbWFuIDIwMTgwNjEzMSUwIwYJKoZI hvcNAQkBFhZwYXVsLmhvZmZtYW5AaWNhbm4ub3JnMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIB CgKCAQEArTbxBbfxbk1VxDQsOmEm14Yta2AE5cBcJ/ktMkC+aQrTCMSXrQJfjiMUUndnfAT1DWcf jg706vvITa1lkFaLoF9b6cNICMKsibFruFy8ZA2bsIPRXPPzSsY6zibdStNCpruNTQoiL9bIxlQp qRUx/BfvHAhS7g5dAOcRgkpW9Q4Si5bl6A2qS0ImIMzktNcVxrWAn0HsG9u8cKcSCBJxavRAnMt/ XhE7tCICjyoeoprYZ2ztmdZUL6UgMNrDz/KoeNHAWzTAH45hn1Jz1IguGLM/M2Vb8mF8eP3wAh4p MVIi2jCwNqC497R8x0lsNryoG+uy/26nK6fhCTqVfF6hgQIDAQABo4IB7zCCAeswHwYDVR0jBBgw FoAU5wIjgABP2Ne8lAvZP3Q5STI8inkwHQYDVR0OBBYEFD+ST5hEHbTuHJZT9husDN7VLQdgMAwG A1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwIQYDVR0RBBowGIEWcGF1bC5ob2ZmbWFuQGljYW5uLm9yZzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8E BAMCBaAwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMEMGA1UdIAQ8MDowOAYKYIZIAYb9 bAQBAjAqMCgGCCsGAQUFBwIBFhxodHRwczovL3d3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vQ1BTMIGIBgNVHR8E gYAwfjA9oDugOYY3aHR0cDovL2NybDMuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0RpZ2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFzc3VyZWRJ RENBLWcyLmNybDA9oDugOYY3aHR0cDovL2NybDQuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0RpZ2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFz c3VyZWRJRENBLWcyLmNybDB5BggrBgEFBQcBAQRtMGswJAYIKwYBBQUHMAGGGGh0dHA6Ly9vY3Nw LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTBDBggrBgEFBQcwAoY3aHR0cDovL2NhY2VydHMuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0Rp Z2lDZXJ0U0hBMkFzc3VyZWRJRENBLmNydDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFAAOCAQEAA7vGiITVJvEIgFN3 UVszD4nyt8ks8d/Ik5Uj1jPuD8+NX4lBpDOIvfYkCn8KYSrx+sMQrpoS2enbOMwekef3tObl2hVK 2Q+tv1GksPq9tQ98Ab1Odv1IM9aYaU1alR5/EEhc0uqs1Ulz2WUc8x/anf3/IpbHyEPdOCLiL9mi b4GDM8z9mqvAE+MtisqRs2+wlMzC/63sNKpA6KdfBNKMLHnyqCAKF7luGWp612yPmGoh63bBLrpR JQorI/fsv5SE2pK3Xf53W/ELf6sxWMsXm9iEgMeoAOtDeJHrv+i+vlldwHHJK6zlXIdVrjxRklyg ISXmlsdHs/sDp1MEqZTOXDCCBk4wggU2oAMCAQICEASueWBmZpAaucV/pmxb3M0wDQYJKoZIhvcN AQELBQAwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3 LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBSb290IENBMB4XDTEz MTEwNTEyMDAwMFoXDTI4MTEwNTEyMDAwMFowZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lD ZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgU0hB MiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA3PgRIz9qte/A J3kbLQWHohBDMd8O1BUbT3ekIs4+jHDwvgeO3ScqvAEdtiwKyt1pWB9B7WoFH9pjeFkeIiwr+Lp+ yTU7VvEffEJ+JbAjGcZFONc9RPkgfGCuHLBaGAS+jzv3qfCUmqYMY0m2QRdTQDK9T+ZQelAfJUXo 8Ymvzf9e/1Dz8BcR/73FifW9YrnY+45FBIVtmc3FSE39JqsCNkXqNtdfauIagkEK3OnZ9ZEXjsYh rTg8E+Yef2ac1U3ZRtr2z1KnfTskw7TBUTXGm+vU737kewPhRL16CzfgT8uCig1xGOSm4IksG/Oy czzBsJKeGH29q33FfQihLMKfcwIDAQABo4IC+DCCAvQwEgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB/wIBADAOBgNV HQ8BAf8EBAMCAYYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEKDAmMCQGCCsGAQUFBzABhhhodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5kaWdp Y2VydC5jb20wgYEGA1UdHwR6MHgwOqA4oDaGNGh0dHA6Ly9jcmw0LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9EaWdp Q2VydEFzc3VyZWRJRFJvb3RDQS5jcmwwOqA4oDaGNGh0dHA6Ly9jcmwzLmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9E aWdpQ2VydEFzc3VyZWRJRFJvb3RDQS5jcmwwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwME MIIBswYDVR0gBIIBqjCCAaYwggGiBgpghkgBhv1sAAIEMIIBkjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cHM6 Ly93d3cuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0NQUzCCAWQGCCsGAQUFBwICMIIBVh6CAVIAQQBuAHkAIAB1AHMA ZQAgAG8AZgAgAHQAaABpAHMAIABDAGUAcgB0AGkAZgBpAGMAYQB0AGUAIABjAG8AbgBzAHQAaQB0 AHUAdABlAHMAIABhAGMAYwBlAHAAdABhAG4AYwBlACAAbwBmACAAdABoAGUAIABEAGkAZwBpAEMA ZQByAHQAIABDAFAALwBDAFAAUwAgAGEAbgBkACAAdABoAGUAIABSAGUAbAB5AGkAbgBnACAAUABh AHIAdAB5ACAAQQBnAHIAZQBlAG0AZQBuAHQAIAB3AGgAaQBjAGgAIABsAGkAbQBpAHQAIABsAGkA YQBiAGkAbABpAHQAeQAgAGEAbgBkACAAYQByAGUAIABpAG4AYwBvAHIAcABvAHIAYQB0AGUAZAAg AGgAZQByAGUAaQBuACAAYgB5ACAAcgBlAGYAZQByAGUAbgBjAGUALjAdBgNVHQ4EFgQU5wIjgABP 2Ne8lAvZP3Q5STI8inkwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUReuir/SSy4IxLVGLp6chnfNtyA8wDQYJKoZIhvcN AQELBQADggEBAE7UiSe5/R2Hd34PKAWQ8QovyTs+vZOckMav+pFRhzJUa+jKwXFRXJmOtfrgYhmZ pgeafBMn2+UCooQS2RX2CkRXxDSPbXMfOtagAT3e44LkRWuy6yX9gF4dOZC+W0L2zpFg4/mgVgxI EM4zaHvNk6vwastPWA+5e10bBIGepyLiV0kn7pKTCL5pCFMCOi5dyBn0UIBOAtmwXZG0k4f5lpaB VUCOZu2C2LsoX+1MYe0GWCgZUxFEvEcgKbIEbNiJVJk7ddtneCweknjGVT1YEhEybr1DDE0023vG QtvsvqubYUwGkuOO3yEqUFcEwGCiNdUknmY3CUnP1fhls+DibsIxggMpMIIDJQIBATB5MGUxCzAJ BgNVBAYTAlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5j b20xJDAiBgNVBAMTG0RpZ2lDZXJ0IFNIQTIgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBDQQIQBvN44l5anjz638FFBB+G ZzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFAKCCAYEwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0B CQUxDxcNMjAwMzE4MTQ1ODEzWjAvBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxIgQgV2wwpcfOYGrbqAresFM1Yo1NiAQz +IW3getiiyU7gfMwgYgGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDF7MHkwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERp Z2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQg U0hBMiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBAhAG83jiXlqePPrfwUUEH4ZnMIGKBgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzF7oHkw ZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2lj ZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgU0hBMiBBc3N1cmVkIElEIENBAhAG83jiXlqePPrf wUUEH4ZnMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIBAKP3FUOtXUAfJp/Hpd/kHyIVsVBA2PLCB4QPlU2USv7P CYezp/DJMoO1CEuSmY6o/4nkFflwCG+iFZbQALXD5HzVcuEhhnHR34aHL3qu3fqlcy1QuCIHe2S9 N7MAaWmgS8AQy8jG0un9E4cP8neF44dicrqwbheY5vugJCgyF19STPaoI85aRuWn9rRv3cVK3iRE 7hg4+On9IkZn/sncyZxdXeG+17fveh24HaF6I6mNxROe/SHpBshUfsmjDu8TTRAy8mXC/Bwp7jg2 Qkn3D1Wq0R0ZrDoGyudmUkgQ9BPAL32tIzOsVUt26GWPWUR1s6NexnIp3hMuvfC8vV8b2v8AAAAA AAA= --Apple-Mail=_B1379DD6-F298-4DB1-854F-E516A378A593-- From nobody Wed Mar 18 09:11:16 2020 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 473AF3A1808 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:11:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=Pk1971oY; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=pEXT3ALZ 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 JG3wApJl14i8 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E58F93A05A0 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:11:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5030; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584547867; x=1585757467; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=KhRszMeAn7h0fnZHhw4MlnYQn9XG+86rrnmiZLxXJM4=; b=Pk1971oYhSkf9SU5G+kRJIGPUKLCmPJgftPWpnk1EHkonpmvariK86Kz CEtarOvgLJo6kDmPWLu+iEZislcg4wVU+EPnAHW6ok7BLnNzErXxBCNrC XuaQUYegOb9xErRfi85KzpeX1JM2pfgTW8LNB0ZLIvmgEd2HNowg5ANBJ 4=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AZPCdOx2b/6HhNQESsmDT+zVfbzU7u7jyIg8e44?= =?us-ascii?q?YmjLQLaKm44pD+JxKHt+51ggrPWoPWo7JfhuzavrqoeFRI4I3J8RVgOIdJSw?= =?us-ascii?q?dDjMwXmwI6B8vQE1L6KOLtaQQxHd9JUxlu+HToeUU=3D?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CbBQC6R3Je/4wNJK1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFgUQgBAsqCoQMg0UDimyCX5gYglIDVAkBAQEMAQEtAgQ?= =?us-ascii?q?BAYRDAheBfyQ4EwIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEFBG2FVgyFYwEBAQECARIREQwBATc?= =?us-ascii?q?BCwQCAQgRBAEBAwImAgICMBUICAIEAQ0FCBqFTwMOIAEDowECgTmIYnWBMoJ?= =?us-ascii?q?/AQEFhQQYggwJgQ4qjC4agUE/gRFHgk0+hAVIgw8ygiyNaT+CSoYbmTgKgjy?= =?us-ascii?q?XFZtJjwabXwIEAgQFAg4BAQWBaSKBRAwIcBU7gmxQGA2OHQeDbIpVdIEpjR0?= =?us-ascii?q?BgQ8BAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,568,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="461682369" Received: from alln-core-7.cisco.com ([173.36.13.140]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 18 Mar 2020 16:11:07 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (xch-rcd-001.cisco.com [173.37.102.11]) by alln-core-7.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02IGB70x022530 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:11:07 GMT Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 11:11:06 -0500 Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 11:11:06 -0500 Received: from NAM12-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:11:06 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=EIY/SKsCoPTA0VzyXCSEz+tDsyz8PKnXHtnGTmjQOPb5t+uIbAMh7n+wtw9JJG4ZAVblu0Fe/YNXBRX5Wd13Vb51u+t5xblihWP9KFWBvYk/FugbHLkQuAXeqx3PBCAkQhcdWfsxFKMLam1HsExcTFQdog49vr85As0Xq2lJXmRBObz1OjqJtrBu+cxF33HeRJmMEP13AVjlKlDT7R2E5bqodO9yeutvyZjam0isuBgtRvmaXihg5Nv8JRcAEtOE+J1k3s9IzK92wRyCBP+SluY4Y7NKGahD+BYWO7FxGDUtm1Ri3T0aHIT+VL77HseRneEpI9W/M2RrcNPyWqXWVQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KhRszMeAn7h0fnZHhw4MlnYQn9XG+86rrnmiZLxXJM4=; b=S+92rlPHP4lgIX/jYZ69TYgQ+5e1i/zXrDTrgN9JV0EfSuJ7JUIdvmtllc/STwF+pT95JYyBkUgWiVRhT75L6f9VcMngQlqKBvG2UYQV4Rp/46TtqPNHjQ4/GYd67pWNzGHfrbmJpk94i9KCIfF7UyR3oSXTOn79qgEBYYQ0PUI5Ieb+GyNDU6z71aWqUNv3zGUWMoJ65bjbSJokoJ/NcAU6pwaeoizDBHqPeCVMdD02YPmv61nvb7o0PnKd6cMoKDWpLbiXnGQTGmVUiYtJrrd/YwdtGqduOIqwvMt1mKn2BNlQHFp7qVt3OjbhmIB9LmYqBZ+IY3XZiY5taVi9ww== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KhRszMeAn7h0fnZHhw4MlnYQn9XG+86rrnmiZLxXJM4=; b=pEXT3ALZaeoNjeWtwYEGZs5FM38C+VbuD5uQ8/J1/is/E+LHjDRsyBoRn68kp9r4oS3Ve5yKKu+nSGVF5pGvrfS1qMFytocalLx7nb5+/gkhaRItI0Dj6aC4vRGUF2N+cJiDdVO/ehi2WH/t1ywNBnkfM8PMcsLbAnt1aPXy3yA= Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:190::17) by MN2PR11MB4367.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:18b::14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2835.18; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:11:05 +0000 Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2835.017; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:11:05 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: "Salz, Rich" , Warren Kumari CC: Eric Rescorla , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fVOrEs0dx38kq7fR7QMBYfoahLQTKAgADvHQCAAKejAIAATLIAgAABkYCAAAMkgIABJvswgAAgXQCAABI5cA== Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:11:05 +0000 Message-ID: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [82.15.79.32] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 9933e572-1ef0-4f7c-efad-08d7cb56f64d x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB4367: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8273; x-forefront-prvs: 03468CBA43 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(136003)(346002)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(199004)(86362001)(52536014)(66556008)(64756008)(66446008)(33656002)(76116006)(5660300002)(7696005)(478600001)(53546011)(71200400001)(66476007)(6506007)(66946007)(81156014)(8676002)(4326008)(8936002)(110136005)(54906003)(186003)(55016002)(26005)(316002)(81166006)(9686003)(2906002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB4367; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: cfiIkShBKGSElM6voWyJpZqnZcIuF/HNiivDjoNlq32eCFch7mnIGZAHdgK7ErFU1C7jdNI7MZ15+DI3XylNfe+eg9pM1bNVP6NFy5mhsotfaH1dGIwfCQCOJRHMUCK2m/Vu1zOtFtT5XRORSYnW0DzBJUqfXuSQZrwSQRZE4FbwJlcU2e7N0IgO9242zbqTZ5s5+SjNAynDJ+q0eHWc9QE4cVo64jPtyrSkK52PVqdV8UsxUckSTfOjbrlwPZclqhCOUlTRuXpdGdEBd0Kk35Wv5KZAFtL8m+rx70OynCy32OIuEE1GvrFIdu+5YvzVM7uXke591JIsTCwdScCBpPDJi7yh+9g3+RQRKm/7L4DNOu/zELFnfjoVFrHZwqdPFFhmFcu8Scla2JKnlC/4NJ5miALtC5hyKLNRD+AIJObWGhUu6Px/oRJsYGM7rDiE x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: lROVos2v4n5v+C8f2Uf8VlNPCjn4Y8LlqGxTV5adwzeToVciyMpuzjDYtx0t76IRhufNCwRB8VTkRrDdjhF+cY5AYU5eo8loW2qNsMzXRZC/Uhfx5+Je0E5rQYPSsPZWnSmxz4+JMI+f+x1f0aqIYg== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9933e572-1ef0-4f7c-efad-08d7cb56f64d X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 18 Mar 2020 16:11:05.3264 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: ZvF1UzodOkscMV2/hcChhfzLYQWX/8pKgt+5XQ7Xap5fAxK+Gp7zcevp/oMrqNr7YTd/VxnGg4GZKfHAQ4WJuA== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB4367 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.11, xch-rcd-001.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-7.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 16:11:11 -0000 SGkgUmljaCwNCg0KPiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiBGcm9tOiBTYWx6LCBS aWNoIDxyc2FsekBha2FtYWkuY29tPg0KPiBTZW50OiAxOCBNYXJjaCAyMDIwIDE0OjQ0DQo+IFRv OiBSb2IgV2lsdG9uIChyd2lsdG9uKSA8cndpbHRvbkBjaXNjby5jb20+OyBXYXJyZW4gS3VtYXJp DQo+IDx3YXJyZW5Aa3VtYXJpLm5ldD4NCj4gQ2M6IEVyaWMgUmVzY29ybGEgPGVrckBydGZtLmNv bT47IGlldGYtYW5kLWdpdGh1YkBpZXRmLm9yZywgPGlldGYtYW5kLQ0KPiBnaXRodWJAaWV0Zi5v cmc+OyBNYXJ0aW4gVGhvbXNvbiA8bXRAbG93ZW50cm9weS5uZXQ+DQo+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBb SWV0Zi1hbmQtZ2l0aHViXSBSdWxlcyByZWdhcmRpbmcgb3duZXJzaGlwIG9mIG9yZ3MNCj4gDQo+ ID4gICAgSWYgdGhlIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBpcyB0aGF0IGl0IGlzIG9rYXkgZm9yIHRoZSBTZWNyZXRh cmlhdCB0byBiZSBvd25lcg0KPiBvZiBhbGwgb2YgdGhlIFdHIHJlcG9zLCB0aGVuIEkgc3VnZ2Vz dCB0aGUgbGlzdCBvZiBvd25lcnMgYmU6DQo+ICAgICAgTVVTVCBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCAmIFJlc3Bv bnNpYmxlIEFEICh3aGljaCBhdXRvbWF0aWNhbGx5IGVuZm9yY2VzIGENCj4gbWluaW11bSBvZiAy KQ0KPiAgICAgIE1BWSBXRyBjaGFpcnMgJiBvdGhlciBBRHMgZm9yIHRoZSBhcmVhLg0KPiANCj4g VGhpcyB3aWxsIG5vdCB3b3JrIGJlY2F1c2UgdGhlIFdHIGNoYWlycywgYXMgb3duZXJzLCB3aWxs IG5lZWQgdG8gZG8gdGhlDQo+IGRheS10by1kYXkgdGhpbmdzIGxpa2UgY3JlYXRpbmcgcmVwbydz IGZvciBJLUQncywgY3JlYXRpbmcgdGVhbXMgZm9yIHRob3NlDQo+IEktRCdzLCBldGMuDQpbUldd IA0KDQpJc24ndCB0aGF0IGEgc3BsaXQgYmV0d2VlbiBvcmdhbml6YXRpb25hbCBvd25lciB2cyBh ZG1pbnM/ICBJLmUuIHRoZSBXRw0KY2hhaXJzIGFyZSBhZG1pbnMgZm9yIHRoZSByZXBvc2l0b3Jp ZXMsIGJ1dCB0aGUgb3JnYW5pemF0aW9uIG93bmVycyBhcmUgdGhlDQpTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCwgcmVz cG9uc2libGUgQUQocyksIGFuZCBwZXJoYXBzIGNoYWlycy4NCg0KDQpGV0lXLCB0aGUgY3VycmVu dCB0ZXh0IGluIGdpdGh1Yi0wMiBpcyB0aGlzOg0KDQoyLjEuICBPcmdhbml6YXRpb25zDQoNCiAg IE9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbnMgYXJlIGEgd2F5IG9mIGZvcm1pbmcgZ3JvdXBzIG9mIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9y cyBvbiBHaXRIdWIuDQogICBFYWNoIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAgU0hPVUxEIGNyZWF0ZSBhIG5ldyBv cmdhbml6YXRpb24gZm9yIHRoZSBXb3JraW5nDQogICBHcm91cC4gIEEgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBv cmdhbml6YXRpb24gU0hPVUxEIGJlIG5hbWVkIGNvbnNpc3RlbnRseSBzbw0KICAgdGhhdCBpdCBj YW4gYmUgZm91bmQuICBGb3IgaW5zdGFuY2UsIHRoZSBuYW1lIGNvdWxkIGJlIGlldGYtPHdnbmFt ZT4NCiAgIG9yIGlldGYtPHdnbmFtZT4td2cuDQoNCiAgIEEgc2luZ2xlIG9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbiBT SE9VTEQgTk9UIGJlIHVzZWQgZm9yIGFsbCBJRVRGIGFjdGl2aXR5LCBvcg0KICAgYWxsIGFjdGl2 aXR5IHdpdGhpbiBhbiBhcmVhLiAgTGFyZ2Ugb3JnYW5pemF0aW9ucyBjcmVhdGUgdG9vIG11Y2gN CiAgIG92ZXJoZWFkIGZvciBnZW5lcmFsIG1hbmFnZW1lbnQgdGFza3MsIHBhcnRpY3VsYXJseSB3 aGVuIHRoZXJlIGlzIGENCiAgIG5lZWQgdG8gbWFpbnRhaW4gbWVtYmVyc2hpcC4NCg0KICAgRWFj aCBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZXMgb3duZXJzLiAgVGhlIG93bmVyIHRlYW0gZm9yIGEgV29y a2luZw0KICAgR3JvdXAgcmVwb3NpdG9yeSBNVVNUIGluY2x1ZGUgcmVzcG9uc2libGUgQXJlYSBE aXJlY3RvcnMuICBBcmVhDQogICBEaXJlY3RvcnMgTUFZIGFsc28gZGVzaWduYXRlIGEgZGVsZWdh dGUgdGhhdCBiZWNvbWVzIGFuIG93bmVyIGFuZA0KICAgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBjaGFpcnMgTUFZ IGFsc28gYmUgb3duZXJzLg0KDQogICBBIHRlYW0gd2l0aCBhZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yIGFjY2VzcyBT SE9VTEQgYmUgY3JlYXRlZCBmb3IgdGhlIFdvcmtpbmcNCiAgIEdyb3VwIENoYWlycyBhbmQgYW55 IFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAgU2VjcmV0YXJ5LiAgQWRtaW5pc3RyYXRvciBhY2Nlc3MNCiAgIGlzIHBy ZWZlcmFibGUsIHNpbmNlIHRoaXMgZG9lcyBub3QgYWxzbyBpbmNsdWRlIHRoZSBhYmlsaXR5IHRv IHB1c2gNCiAgIHRvIGFsbCByZXBvc2l0b3JpZXMgYW5kIG93bmVyc2hpcCBkb2VzIG5vdCBncmFu dCBhbnkgb3RoZXINCiAgIHNpZ25pZmljYW50IHByaXZpbGVnZXMuDQoNCiAgIERldGFpbHMgYWJv dXQgY3JlYXRpbmcgb3JnYW5pemF0aW9ucyBhZGhlcmluZyB0byB0aGVzZSBndWlkZWxpbmVzIGNh bg0KICAgYmUgZm91bmQgaW4gW0dJVC1DT05GSUddLg0KDQoNCk15IHN1Z2dlc3Rpb24gaXMgdG8g Y2hhbmdlIHRoZSB0aGlyZCBwYXJhZ3JhcGggdG8gc29tZXRoaW5nIGxpa2UgdGhpcywNCmFuZCBs ZWF2ZSB0aGUgcmVzdCB0aGUgc2FtZToNCg0KICAgRWFjaCBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZXMg b3duZXJzLiAgVGhlIG93bmVyIHRlYW0gZm9yIGEgV29ya2luZw0KICAgR3JvdXAgcmVwb3NpdG9y eSBNVVNUIGluY2x1ZGUgdGhlIHJlc3BvbnNpYmxlIEFyZWEgRGlyZWN0b3IocykgYW5kIHRoZQ0K ICAgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQuICBPdGhlciBBcmVhIERpcmVjdG9ycyBmb3IgdGhlIGFyZWEgcmVzcG9u c2libGUgZm9yDQogICB0aGUgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBNQVkgYWxzbyBiZSBvd25lcnMuICBBcmVh IERpcmVjdG9ycyBNQVkgYWxzbw0KICAgZGVzaWduYXRlIGEgZGVsZWdhdGUgdGhhdCBiZWNvbWVz IGFuIG93bmVyIGFuZCBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIGNoYWlycw0KICAgTUFZIGFsc28gYmUgb3duZXJz Lg0KDQpXaGF0IHlvdSBhcmUgcHJvcG9zaW5nIHNlZW1zIHRvIGJlIGEgbGFyZ2VyIGNoYW5nZSwg aS5lLiB0YWtpbmcgdGhlIEFEcw0Kb3V0IG9mIHRoZSBsb29wIGFsdG9nZXRoZXI/DQoNCg0KSWYg dGhlIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBpcyB0aGF0IGl0IGlzIG9rYXkgZm9yIHRoZSBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCB0byBi ZSBvd25lcg0KPiBvZiBhbGwgb2YgdGhlIFdHIG9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbnMsIHRoZW4gSSBzdWdnZXN0 IHRoZSBsaXN0IG9mIG93bmVycyBiZToNCj4gICAgICBNVVNUIFNlY3JldGFyaWF0ICYgUmVzcG9u c2libGUgQUQgKHdoaWNoIGF1dG9tYXRpY2FsbHkgZW5mb3JjZXMgYQ0KPiBtaW5pbXVtIG9mIDIp DQo+ICAgICAgTUFZIFdHIGNoYWlycyAmIG90aGVyIEFEcyBmb3IgdGhlIGFyZWEuDQoNCg0KPiAN Cj4gSSB2aWV3IHRoZSBBRCBhcyBhIGJhY2t1cC4gIE1hbnkgV0cgY2hhaXJzIGhhdmUgbG9uZ2Vy IHRlbnVyZSB0aGFuIHRoZSBBRA0KPiB3aG8gaXMgcmVzcG9uc2libGUuDQoNCkkgY29tcGxldGVs eSBhZ3JlZSB0aGF0IGl0IGlzIHRoZSBXRyBjaGFpcnMgd2hvIHdpbGwgZG8gdGhlIGRheS10by1k YXkNCmFkbWluaXN0cmF0aW9uLCBidXQgaXQgd2lsbCBzZWVtIHRvIGJlIHNvbWV3aGF0IHN0cmFu Z2UgaWYgdGhlIGdpdGh1Yg0Kb3JnYW5pemF0aW9uIGhpZXJhcmNoeSBkb2VzbuKAmXQgc29tZXdo YXQgbWF0Y2ggdGhlIElFVEYgb3JnYW5pemF0aW9uYWwNCmhpZXJhcmNoeS4NCg0KUmVnYXJkcywN ClJvYg0KDQpbRm9yIGNsYXJpdHksIG5vIGhhdHMsIGJlc2lkZXMgSSdtIHN0aWxsIG9ubHkgYW4g aW5jb21pbmcgQUQgYW55d2F5IC4uLl0NCg== From nobody Wed Mar 18 09:30:19 2020 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 E8CFD3A1896 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:30:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 rjr-SzG42TxR for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:30:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 3AFD33A1850 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:30:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122331.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02IGJgio004314; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:30:05 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=5mV5F+QCyXMHlxH9OeRdneFR2ZIX3yKPH9H01tXmiJ4=; b=QgvMVuF5trSn75104Ii4e/ejhFCUJLmjVXcuV0V5e/xCEKH1utS/Cy0e/pWapvdLbB2a ET1EB+8bgBhcwQZAJHyWbaISAABQvxGZ/Zem9/9EQkYZeOD5BaHTLCkNs4uOEh861AgK dpwLPp7f5UahhH7AeJKhkrB1S360cJguZSGKLq/Fw02RHD855PXCn97obSLcDjoYyx4b icO9G6e8vAy/9TrL7W5YAVZYQbf+xdK5PDVKg3xcE+nn7qUhiPA7k+b7iJZVY64xWukJ sCZWtqgoDbAdpd/XRaGz5H5OXMuTsivGflCsNjl6S6bpDIKJz61Fw8Xrw6kvDZJtvuzw CQ== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ys8nhfgst-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:30:05 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02IGHAs9003048; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:30:04 -0700 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.53]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrw87bmq5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:30:04 -0700 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 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:30:03 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:30:03 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , Warren Kumari CC: Eric Rescorla , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fLpgVLWAg4aEiFanXBcfrtZKhLQTKAgAEyKwCAAKejAIAATLIA//++g4CAAEYygIABKCeA///cIwCAAFt0gP//wj0A Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:30:02 +0000 Message-ID: <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.118.63] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <6B07F9CD5874FB4297CE2CE855130463@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-18_07:2020-03-18, 2020-03-18 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003180075 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-18_07:2020-03-18, 2020-03-18 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003180075 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 16:30:17 -0000 PiAgICBJc24ndCB0aGF0IGEgc3BsaXQgYmV0d2VlbiBvcmdhbml6YXRpb25hbCBvd25lciB2cyBh ZG1pbnM/IA0KDQpJIGNvdWxkIHdlbGwgYmUgd3JvbmcgaGVyZS4gIEhPV0VWRVIsIGl0IHNlZW1z IGxpa2VseSB0aGF0IHRoZSBXRyBjaGFpciB3aWxsIGJlIGNyZWF0aW5nIHRoZSBvcmdhbml6YXRp b24sIGFuZCB0aGVyZWZvcmUgYmUgYW4gb3duZXIuICBUaGVyZSdzIGxvdHMgb2Ygcm9vbSBmb3Ig Y3VzdG9taXphdGlvbiBhbmQgdHdlYWtzIChHaXRIdWIgYmlrZXNoZWRkaW5nPyksIGFuZCB0aGUg ZHJhZnQgZG9lc24ndCBzdWdnZXN0IGhvdyB0byBkbyAqZXZlcnl0aGluZy4qICBUb29scyBsaWtl IE1hcnRpbidzLCBvciBteSBzY3JpcHRzLCBoZWxwIGNvZGlmeSB0aGluZ3MsIGJ1dCB0aGUgV0cg Y2hhaXIgc3RpbGwgaGFzLCByaWdodGx5IHNvLCBhIGdyZWF0IGRlYWwgb2YgbGV2ZXJhZ2UgdG8g c2V0IHVwIHRoZSBHSCBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24gYXMgdGhleSBzZWUgZml0LiAgVGhvc2UgdGhpbmdz IHRvZ2V0aGVyIGluZGljYXRlLCB0byBtZSwgdGhhdCB0aGV5IG5lZWQgdG8gb3duIHRoZSBvcmdh bml6YXRpb24gYW5kIHJlcG8ncyB3aXRoaW4gaXQuICAgDQoNCj4gICAgV2hhdCB5b3UgYXJlIHBy b3Bvc2luZyBzZWVtcyB0byBiZSBhIGxhcmdlciBjaGFuZ2UsIGkuZS4gdGFraW5nIHRoZSBBRHMN CiAgICBvdXQgb2YgdGhlIGxvb3AgYWx0b2dldGhlcj8NCiAgDQpUaGF0IHdhc24ndCBteSBpbnRl bnQuICBUaGVyZSBhcmUgdGhyZWUgcG90ZW50aWFsIGdyb3VwcyB0byBiZSBvd25lcnM6IFdHIGNo YWlyLCBBRCwgc2VjcmV0YXJpYXQuIEkgd2FzIG9ubHkgc3VnZ2VzdGluZyBhIG1pbmltdW0gbnVt YmVyIGFuZCBwb2ludGluZyBvdXQgdGhlIHBvb2wgb2YgY2FuZGlkYXRlcyB0byBiZSBvd25lci4N Cg0KPiAgICBhZG1pbmlzdHJhdGlvbiwgYnV0IGl0IHdpbGwgc2VlbSB0byBiZSBzb21ld2hhdCBz dHJhbmdlIGlmIHRoZSBnaXRodWINCiAgICBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24gaGllcmFyY2h5IGRvZXNu4oCZ dCBzb21ld2hhdCBtYXRjaCB0aGUgSUVURiBvcmdhbml6YXRpb25hbA0KICAgIGhpZXJhcmNoeS4N CiAgDQoNCg== From nobody Wed Mar 18 10:12:04 2020 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 981033A192D for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:11:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=I+q7wDWh; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=Gpxghuai 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 W0w4xcDgCZZ2 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EDD93A1930 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:11:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3696; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584551510; x=1585761110; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=UAf4A6o4y5mbQPxkLJS0dcFo1dkkhwuug3I8AjTb3Ds=; b=I+q7wDWhPhBElZYX6jkNcy+1Z0j4B4yZvtj9gUuXEWiTNEpAX34j624A 7AgZjGug+kzvtwhnZOu8AeYffQgHRJbFuveKEbwDYwUdA6ebT46gsJIKY Kn59Bg4KTNw3uo9paaMNynBOMqcNMVtKGRk83TzO4a6XWRi1l0xGwzpZa U=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AGk4kdh+WdjBQSP9uRHGN82YQeigqvan1NQcJ65?= =?us-ascii?q?0hzqhDabmn44+8ZB7E/fs4iljPUM2b8P9Ch+fM+4HYEW0bqdfk0jgZdYBUER?= =?us-ascii?q?oMiMEYhQslVdSaCEnnK/jCZC0hF8MEX1hgrDm2?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CbBQDKVXJe/5pdJa1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFgUQgBAsqCoQMg0UDim2CX5gYglIDVAkBAQEMAQEtAgQ?= =?us-ascii?q?BAYRDAheBfyQ4EwIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEFBG2FVgyFYwEBAQECARIREQwBATc?= =?us-ascii?q?BCwQCAQgRBAEBAwImAgICMBUICAIEAQ0FCBqFTwMOIAEDonsCgTmIYnWBMoJ?= =?us-ascii?q?/AQEFhQUYggwJgQ4qiWN4gVMagUE/gRFHgk0+hE2DDzKCLJByn1MKgjyXFZt?= =?us-ascii?q?JjwabXwIEAgQFAg4BAQWBaSKBRAwIcBWDJ1AYDY4dg3OKVXSBKY0dAYEPAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,568,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="473935496" Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 18 Mar 2020 17:11:49 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02IHBnaQ002680 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:11:49 GMT Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:11:49 -0500 Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:11:48 -0500 Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 13:11:48 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=J/+5hmwR/rlCutgkNoNqpT//eZnVJj64bEcAlmI0MBe/B8YHqbLLXW/nFmHqKvGoUYSJjhlb3blv+RmP2UZ1ivEZ/WcLBXLyax+suhJOYbKDeBKnSPDPKjevtCf2qssE0dPs9XxUFiHbOEI/qPxTLCf9NzEzZlouxMi4j74y5oDojRg7AccJEt6OUdfkZbv4qlMCrVOBn472qy0SyxVbIvUeg/pxhFDYQMRVHtUQxPVaTDDHolPbFXCrGTHsURy3F+alAb4upXTY0IPO35o/wxlhg/bnRlGlUBF+go6umMvGmivfRQqdIztKdFUnRWOs3ZqzztiVUDKxazGk199b9A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=UAf4A6o4y5mbQPxkLJS0dcFo1dkkhwuug3I8AjTb3Ds=; b=h0+dTnGTv5tX/3vN6jcpUojqE/P3G/iPtbfU1UzhluZiaG0QIx5hpkAtO1auF+0LT62AJocPgzrrSYwMyKm1Z6roBzUPO2nl0nBWJd14FLCNriIrwT/fhQf05vlDDhzzaWYSNIBITtL4SsbR3KR3Y/Q2L9+EAwVjAc9/Szbhhq5YSOHmRZCLBP0Wtht2Lr3sqBYC10Pyps9d6+Pc2NeS2MJxz7/YJHLU5+57e5SupNV2d8Afdkk4dlrwYXIpyg3NoVjjIln5aRWRTdPIdOJtJwG5YtbYtLSQcZxqfGmfQuFRfoal3fmLOm8P4liBxFVydUdxUEa3DS7Z3MTd0uGisA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=UAf4A6o4y5mbQPxkLJS0dcFo1dkkhwuug3I8AjTb3Ds=; b=GpxghuainMr/hK7X0tAKQgCiwXKyZSs6EIpxUqFDCO4wML7kcAwWJxUhfJSwv79W/RsMde9TBXbrO54sZfc5HNJpYq5/w0uUq/j8Lj2LpEwSSd+o2LMH6eeBPUBCE0ML2YUDVTrXgzRPIZqz6YSzjN/eVIly3W+7sllX8vFxLwc= Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:190::17) by MN2PR11MB3934.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:152::20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.22; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:11:47 +0000 Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2835.017; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:11:47 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: "Salz, Rich" , Warren Kumari CC: Eric Rescorla , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," , Martin Thomson Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fVOrEs0dx38kq7fR7QMBYfoahLQTKAgADvHQCAAKejAIAATLIAgAABkYCAAAMkgIABJvswgAAgXQCAABI5cIAAC3gAgAAFm+A= Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:11:46 +0000 Message-ID: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [82.15.79.32] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 938eb004-00f8-4763-e9e0-08d7cb5f70f6 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3934: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 03468CBA43 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(39860400002)(376002)(136003)(346002)(366004)(199004)(81156014)(81166006)(8936002)(71200400001)(316002)(478600001)(54906003)(33656002)(110136005)(9686003)(186003)(76116006)(6506007)(55016002)(53546011)(26005)(2906002)(4326008)(8676002)(5660300002)(86362001)(64756008)(52536014)(66476007)(66556008)(7696005)(66446008)(66946007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB3934; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 6gav2c2kCymTRnxl0toX9pulfOhbRnpCoGt6CHLhCyA876arRT38S+EFMGzootrSUzHdvG+IfbbolzSDugGePDHXAmcmgCbqkkB/Ut1ApDC37LGgR+wwp4SsWc8vs5CtQB/qIs8Q+/d9QN5zy6YCdSczC88YgJ1YFnzCD4mYfwzkV9n8q4YvcErv10ausgptHmL035W8ZKluMON4ZJgkTucv0iBJQ0PzApO9dZ3obn4Y7p2WFkh2euWt460BgrFnNYbJC8ZPH4Y67+DUngUaXeFmsDL4DL0TM/3lCJGAnDCnDRL1Gwzc9uzTpXi7zfuIZhzXI4c7+n4lCfVev/dHTj1DmVembTtP3S7XJnlzGySh0iR/jQ8T92m6dtLlgfjiQ2+QhKfNHRbszIOhgBK6w68Ar5ZRyChZ3Qd6w4bzf68iS112KJ9tT2F+U25SiXH/ x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: DpcStavCwc5IE4mHHhQRYmf9zYgnmhTGOsIVvgcM1Q5WKolbQziwoEEKdrLORpSpQCheW/+yanYBc7Teu724DlBrJTbEi8V/YxCeM9t0BBiT3p92AgxRV4pKcg88d0xvabqdtBNEoGUsJjEqFNJWXQ== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 938eb004-00f8-4763-e9e0-08d7cb5f70f6 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 18 Mar 2020 17:11:47.0128 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: Y5oe3qYtdpfT0dzYWUn9niv8gtyoMU/NBLeRFqH7KHZ7cPiW2NgrRkcRhvj7CdaYAwRmD0I6oZLpaKWxmpKNWg== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3934 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.13, xch-aln-003.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-3.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 17:12:03 -0000 DQoNCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gRnJvbTogU2FseiwgUmljaCA8cnNh bHpAYWthbWFpLmNvbT4NCj4gU2VudDogMTggTWFyY2ggMjAyMCAxNjozMA0KPiBUbzogUm9iIFdp bHRvbiAocndpbHRvbikgPHJ3aWx0b25AY2lzY28uY29tPjsgV2FycmVuIEt1bWFyaQ0KPiA8d2Fy cmVuQGt1bWFyaS5uZXQ+DQo+IENjOiBFcmljIFJlc2NvcmxhIDxla3JAcnRmbS5jb20+OyBpZXRm LWFuZC1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5vcmcsIDxpZXRmLWFuZC0NCj4gZ2l0aHViQGlldGYub3JnPjsgTWFy dGluIFRob21zb24gPG10QGxvd2VudHJvcHkubmV0Pg0KPiBTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW0lldGYtYW5k LWdpdGh1Yl0gUnVsZXMgcmVnYXJkaW5nIG93bmVyc2hpcCBvZiBvcmdzDQo+IA0KPiA+ICAgIElz bid0IHRoYXQgYSBzcGxpdCBiZXR3ZWVuIG9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbmFsIG93bmVyIHZzIGFkbWlucz8N Cj4gDQo+IEkgY291bGQgd2VsbCBiZSB3cm9uZyBoZXJlLiAgSE9XRVZFUiwgaXQgc2VlbXMgbGlr ZWx5IHRoYXQgdGhlIFdHIGNoYWlyDQo+IHdpbGwgYmUgY3JlYXRpbmcgdGhlIG9yZ2FuaXphdGlv biwgYW5kIHRoZXJlZm9yZSBiZSBhbiBvd25lci4gIFRoZXJlJ3MNCj4gbG90cyBvZiByb29tIGZv ciBjdXN0b21pemF0aW9uIGFuZCB0d2Vha3MgKEdpdEh1YiBiaWtlc2hlZGRpbmc/KSwgYW5kIHRo ZQ0KPiBkcmFmdCBkb2Vzbid0IHN1Z2dlc3QgaG93IHRvIGRvICpldmVyeXRoaW5nLiogIFRvb2xz IGxpa2UgTWFydGluJ3MsIG9yIG15DQo+IHNjcmlwdHMsIGhlbHAgY29kaWZ5IHRoaW5ncywgYnV0 IHRoZSBXRyBjaGFpciBzdGlsbCBoYXMsIHJpZ2h0bHkgc28sIGENCj4gZ3JlYXQgZGVhbCBvZiBs ZXZlcmFnZSB0byBzZXQgdXAgdGhlIEdIIG9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbiBhcyB0aGV5IHNlZSBmaXQuDQo+ IFRob3NlIHRoaW5ncyB0b2dldGhlciBpbmRpY2F0ZSwgdG8gbWUsIHRoYXQgdGhleSBuZWVkIHRv IG93biB0aGUNCj4gb3JnYW5pemF0aW9uIGFuZCByZXBvJ3Mgd2l0aGluIGl0Lg0KW1JXXSANCg0K Z2l0LWdpdGh1Yi13Zy1jb25maWd1cmF0aW9uLTA2IHNlY3Rpb24gMi4xIHN1Z2dlc3RzIHRoYXQg dGhlIFdHIGNoYWlycyBzaG91bGQgYmUgYWJsZSB0byByZXF1ZXN0IGNyZWF0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBH aXRIdWIgb3JnYW5pemF0aW9uIGZyb20gRGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuICBJLmUuIHRoZSBzZWNyZXRhcmlh dCB3b3VsZCBlbmQgdXAgZWl0aGVyIGRpcmVjdGx5IG9yIGluZGlyZWN0bHkgY3JlYXRpbmcgdGhl IFdHIGdpdGh1YiBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24uDQoNCkNvbnZlcnNlbHksIGFuIE9wcyBXRyByZWNlbnRs eSBjcmVhdGVkIHRoZSBHaXRodWIgb3JnIHdpdGggdGhlIGNoYWlycyBhcyBvd25lcnMgYW5kIGFs c28gYWRkZWQgbWUgYXMgb3duZXIsIGFzIHRoZSBpbmNvbWluZyByZXNwb25zaWJsZSBBRC4gIEkn bSBhYnNvbHV0ZWx5IGZpbmUgd2l0aCB0aGlzLCBhbHRob3VnaCBvbmNlIHRoaXMgZG9jIGlzIHB1 Ymxpc2hlZCwgSSB3aWxsIHJlY29tbWVuZCB0aGF0IHRoZSBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCBpcyBhbHNvIGFk ZGVkIGFzIGFuIG93bmVyLg0KDQo+IA0KPiA+ICAgIFdoYXQgeW91IGFyZSBwcm9wb3Npbmcgc2Vl bXMgdG8gYmUgYSBsYXJnZXIgY2hhbmdlLCBpLmUuIHRha2luZyB0aGUNCj4gQURzDQo+ICAgICBv dXQgb2YgdGhlIGxvb3AgYWx0b2dldGhlcj8NCj4gDQo+IFRoYXQgd2Fzbid0IG15IGludGVudC4g IFRoZXJlIGFyZSB0aHJlZSBwb3RlbnRpYWwgZ3JvdXBzIHRvIGJlIG93bmVyczogV0cNCj4gY2hh aXIsIEFELCBzZWNyZXRhcmlhdC4gSSB3YXMgb25seSBzdWdnZXN0aW5nIGEgbWluaW11bSBudW1i ZXIgYW5kDQo+IHBvaW50aW5nIG91dCB0aGUgcG9vbCBvZiBjYW5kaWRhdGVzIHRvIGJlIG93bmVy Lg0KDQpJIGRvbid0IGhhdmUgYSBwcm9ibGVtIHdpdGggV0cgY2hhaXJzIGFsc28gYmVpbmcgb3du ZXJzLCBidXQgSSBkb24ndCBzZWUgdGhhdCBpdCBpcyByZXF1aXJlZCwgdGhleSBqdXN0IGhhdmUg dG8gYmUgYWRtaW5zLg0KDQpJIGRvIHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgdGhlIHJlc3BvbnNpYmxlIEFEIE1VU1Qg YmUgYW4gb3duZXIsIGFuZCBpZiB3ZSBhcmUgaGFwcHkgd2l0aCB0aGUgc2VjdXJpdHkgYXNwZWN0 cyB0aGVuIGhhdmluZyB0aGUgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQgYXMgYW5vdGhlciBNVVNUIGlzIG9rYXkuICBJ IGRvbuKAmXQgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB3ZSB3YW50IHRvbyBtYW55IG93bmVycy4gIEkndmUgbm90IGNo ZWNrZWQsIGJ1dCBJIHByZXN1bWUgdGhhdCBhbiBvd25lciBoYXMgcGVybWlzc2lvbnMgdG8gYWRk L3JlbW92ZSBvdGhlciBvd25lcnMsIHNvIHNwcmVhZGluZyBvd25lcnNoaXAgdG9vIHdpZGUgZG9l c24ndCByZWFsbHkgbWFrZSBzZW5zZSB0byBtZSwgYmVjYXVzZSBpdCBqdXN0IHNlZW1zIHRvIGlu Y3JlYXNlIHRoZSBhdHRhY2sgc3VyZmFjZSBvZiBhY2NvdW50cyB0aGF0IGNvdWxkIGJlIGNvbXBy b21pc2VkIGFuZCB0aGVuIGNhdXNlIGhhdm9jLg0KDQpSZWdhcmRzLA0KUm9iIFtObyBoYXRzXQ0K DQoNCj4gDQo+ID4gICAgYWRtaW5pc3RyYXRpb24sIGJ1dCBpdCB3aWxsIHNlZW0gdG8gYmUgc29t ZXdoYXQgc3RyYW5nZSBpZiB0aGUgZ2l0aHViDQo+ICAgICBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24gaGllcmFyY2h5 IGRvZXNu4oCZdCBzb21ld2hhdCBtYXRjaCB0aGUgSUVURiBvcmdhbml6YXRpb25hbA0KPiAgICAg aGllcmFyY2h5Lg0KPiANCg0KDQo= From nobody Wed Mar 18 14:12:07 2020 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 1CA1F3A1C64 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:12:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=WkXmq6mr; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=s2lVCzw8 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 FiE7N1Q1eDcT for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:12:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E41363A1C55 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2327E5C02A4; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:12:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:12:04 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=FkKx8x8OVboxCq7He+JuOl62DSsI ZCBk/8nWm/1GAxQ=; b=WkXmq6mrg5I/6PGSid/rLg32Cgupq5T/tzQFbz4NIyHZ ATfx20VOGCKtK66YNygBGbeMuW17SFP+73TW8gIg7fn9XsH8NoZREci6efLBE6iA tt+EH7WDX7PHB2pVRFRoX+dhWGr33SGln1QEV2mglJkvf0xQzHtT++3vZbZkDFFh ODm/hP+P3WCSZ39mxej7Pc1xdEX7ADMOGAPZPrDSgqZTrkRcUjtsxuW5DnlQUIjF +3aUbUyXR3lHAfHihqELD3NYrMexx3t6GsG1bCk8vTsK4OEnHfJFadALxd76Bngf REQHPcBFvyIzIncrPnmPpQpJIcPl5ZrlxCGAaIcGbA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=FkKx8x 8OVboxCq7He+JuOl62DSsIZCBk/8nWm/1GAxQ=; b=s2lVCzw86xi0yeXidJaPL8 AgaIGp2ilwbl0cP5bvDiFi09rksrUPuWGLnS96DdgB1DNmt+diqz15qtFqHN4T+D fAg/AQobE1c44YfIYMlUmME85M4Wpi8T9yad4lPHEtqDfYvXju6NdIEA2Nnxd7LR nnSCHhtrxUsgm5W+s1XPrq5f35qUEZAGu8TdW8G28iPmuNkF5lvwsYDBf911sj8h PefAoujSzL1RnZ4hps+AXq7Fu8kDNuNdLNM5VA9LItEcR+OUW+WemMT6fxumvYpw gSpJPfDs312+COyspE6q/LsYjlW6cc3xCc+kZXOHr/w3KNDIx79YPFys9Xs4ebQA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefjedgudefkecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc evlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhho figvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 9690CE00A8; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:12:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:11:45 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Salz, Rich" , "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 21:12:06 -0000 On Thu, Mar 19, 2020, at 03:30, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Isn't that a split between organizational owner vs admins? > > I could well be wrong here. HOWEVER, it seems likely that the WG chair > will be creating the organization, and therefore be an owner. There's > lots of room for customization and tweaks (GitHub bikeshedding?), and > the draft doesn't suggest how to do *everything.* Tools like Martin's, > or my scripts, help codify things, but the WG chair still has, rightly > so, a great deal of leverage to set up the GH organization as they see > fit. Those things together indicate, to me, that they need to own the > organization and repo's within it. My understanding is that members can create repos (unless you specifically disable that). But it is also the case that you can't do things like enable CI without being an owner. So I'm inclined to more strongly recommend ownership by chairs. Chairs that don't own the org can always ask for support, but I see no reason not to have this more decentralized and to give chairs more autonomy (that is the practice today and that works well). So... > GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner. The owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area Directors and the IETF Secretariat. Working Group chairs and Area Directors in the area SHOULD also be included as owners. Area Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an owner. An organization MUST have at least 2 owners. From nobody Wed Mar 18 14:31:13 2020 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 57C273A1CA1 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:31:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=gAS5j00b; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=olXpxsYB 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 nd_uqeCpucqn for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F2E23A1C9F for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:30:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2093; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584567059; x=1585776659; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=XQe11heYHKdHpmQx05E3lqMsw99ERmw8AAXohQPLCZE=; b=gAS5j00bNHwZHSo1cj+60KWavHLJAF4jwV3FAO+5NHKvaIEFqm92H9qp UCmoQWOu7/fedYPJbTKbJ1MCP3/i4jBJL4/FgUaxuEmbCzlfNNGKh+9ES 74MMRJoN7YW+i2ogkyJcHg7qxC+gLNG61zDttoA3FvLXJRceqqbGKGbkt U=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AxrPuqROX/Wdu49CgaOsl6mtXPHoupqn0MwgJ65?= =?us-ascii?q?Eul7NJdOG58o//OFDEu60/l0fHCIPc7f8My/HbtaztQyQh2d6AqzhDFf4ETB?= =?us-ascii?q?oZkYMTlg0kDtSCDBjhM//ucys8NM9DT1RiuXq8NBsdFQ=3D=3D?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0COBQB/knJe/4UNJK1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFgUQgBAsqCodRA4ptgl+YGIJSA1QJAQEBDAEBLQIEAQG?= =?us-ascii?q?EQwKCFiQ4EwIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEFBG2FVgyFYwEBAQEDEigGAQE3AQsEAgE?= =?us-ascii?q?IDgMEAQEBHhAyHQgCBA4FCBqFTwMuAQOiWwKBOYhigieCfwEBBYUIGIIMCYE?= =?us-ascii?q?4jC4agUE/gRFHgk0+hE2DQYIsjiqiGwqCPJcVm0mPBptfAgQCBAUCDgEBBYF?= =?us-ascii?q?pIoFEDAhwFYMnUBgNjh2Dc4pVdIEpjR0BgQ8BAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,569,1574121600"; d="scan'208";a="740414141" Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 18 Mar 2020 21:30:24 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (xch-aln-001.cisco.com [173.36.7.11]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02ILUOex029344 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 21:30:24 GMT Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:30:23 -0500 Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:30:22 -0400 Received: from NAM10-BN7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:30:22 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=NKg5NQHA3xphpiJyllliKX1JPVy50PoF+6ykXgwCIPTIC8ir0Cu6k173JpT+Cv/Xa974X4KQr9bgNxdchoArVRFEdm4kaF8ve8nkWJ+ASIlqUEEyzM1JMrr4K2CbcawDpk0Xy9GWF+6yrx4N0rmF53PN3wLlw4H1df1QSKX34fmYvHpcWgN2gaXNKbvwRtherjz61vxysmHl6MdKuqBLUJoNVf3L3ZssXqe1IQuLY9WI2jrp7rgaVs1cY6VgLLM8tPjFVAqUQWQMFRg+orTNs2rF3zPU+d0X1+ghvXQHXm1L37EjMZGJplr4o2gP6ex9xFXGySlEWI+zY3RgL0Ik7A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=/OUYfL59mJvSsCrbksl2Pb5Q63UppmClumSHg9sfWFY=; b=Ezc0X7o5mR1ftG+KNFpIDqFtDHJfa6SLT3qtEMSnvky37X0WDqeyP9fp8Ye7B/ZWTfhIThhJm7MR6jvw5llW4PJ9DsE9qj2IKf4mQEtTr5OnsuZhJ4ah+Wk1FuWkeJlJO19YT+U5BBCemb161gfuV/DbSR+7sc6SML8CUD1y1Gh9xl30j1e+YEPmPfUtJGa5zBsa4U+KJcUgIwpaB0CHG9egJffpPMuPIHxcgoJnEI89PwsmT12G5c4h3+X5bMITFwBmJWZZ2EyuHhhq4u3dz1raEN3POgdlowYM+nyKKDboVAjKbZWmIIUDt3c51ZDNmFyojSIqOqH48FKp4m2k2A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=/OUYfL59mJvSsCrbksl2Pb5Q63UppmClumSHg9sfWFY=; b=olXpxsYBdhUulu/29qvSnKkNmrRbL7kzVG692TybG+MC8mWkUVXdOx56GKny9vvSxfej/snnkK6dVUwp69CpMMeIQR4N4dWpLw/dM/xM1HjlFz8E1i5HynH6lpYrpmaAj4uFZxT/uBKRsscoYdo1/DWHjItf5sKF4YdE5QtmAT4= Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:190::17) by MN2PR11MB4647.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:262::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.14; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 21:30:22 +0000 Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3:2164:a8e2:33b3%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2835.017; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 21:30:22 +0000 From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" To: Martin Thomson , "Salz, Rich" CC: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fVOrEs0dx38kq7fR7QMBYfoahLQTKAgADvHQCAAKejAIAATLIAgAABkYCAAAMkgIABJvswgAAgXQCAABI5cIAAC3gAgABOtoCAAARhYA== Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 21:30:22 +0000 Message-ID: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [82.15.79.32] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 5501967d-4907-4fc4-1175-08d7cb83909d x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB4647: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 03468CBA43 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(136003)(346002)(376002)(39860400002)(366004)(199004)(66476007)(76116006)(86362001)(66946007)(2906002)(66556008)(64756008)(52536014)(5660300002)(4326008)(55016002)(9686003)(66446008)(33656002)(8676002)(478600001)(7696005)(8936002)(316002)(71200400001)(53546011)(81156014)(81166006)(186003)(6506007)(26005)(110136005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB4647; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 5PCR0zci9f8RGv+ynuEZb+9/Y94cRZIsvhTvyKj2ZGODRQ4nWrPUTl3vXpDx4XmEnsjGsmy1tJEuhC2hbuhzEbjnIedHa987VnoEsnFf3IlxVrJ5pQ1BtGc6BxOaM5GHkw6cs00d7YxHpK6KifccV0WqdW4de26n2XcwcjZA0cgA4WBAQM7WUBgSdv0Yh9reFtH2MP7uw4jYZKouGT18CvoBNFSbHD66B2CExFIPpRfGW0jUzRoauejU09vJh1ETUTf17ggI6CVDGO1QF0jwyb785+y8B4s0P0J8Rz0FKSs/n4ogPOyyR2WnBQVyoOXg3rv7n4bjRcKqD06Gd2LNsDybO3PdBhWwxoy2RBLIqf5WUrH8HUNaBphbvTjYaMhLSvHgcHJXBqtn8QqhVieELf95fajOubKp4tPeEHjQIxFsjvurJKoDoV1pt5q0da0w x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: CaOsg7z6Ygy3DaS61XYz5nuYkTFnFqgcmNLHxWuomx8pXd9R+ePa6G86QrJpQvw1bZQ9s5WRS3/fqwr6dPO5VkVMsz6GiWTvtb+ghLlvzvM+w+K6rke1+tLtTAaWC286+6+xwk+yPyTf2tpTRCsTfQ== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 5501967d-4907-4fc4-1175-08d7cb83909d X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 18 Mar 2020 21:30:22.2512 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: qwFXGSkZY1mBgW2X95nQU0bzFqjYLmSM2sp5envGlgdBJdF8EX358jBG7Sv1mZfiIFeaJfVI7o9w/Fsy85uBpQ== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB4647 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.11, xch-aln-001.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-11.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Mar 2020 21:31:11 -0000 I'm okay with this. I still have a preference to make non responsible ADs in the area a MAY rat= her than a SHOULD ... but I won't lose sleep over it. Regards, Rob > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Thomson > Sent: 18 March 2020 21:12 > To: Salz, Rich ; Rob Wilton (rwilton) > > Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, > Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs >=20 > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020, at 03:30, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > Isn't that a split between organizational owner vs admins? > > > > I could well be wrong here. HOWEVER, it seems likely that the WG > > chair will be creating the organization, and therefore be an owner. > > There's lots of room for customization and tweaks (GitHub > > bikeshedding?), and the draft doesn't suggest how to do *everything.* > > Tools like Martin's, or my scripts, help codify things, but the WG > > chair still has, rightly so, a great deal of leverage to set up the GH > > organization as they see fit. Those things together indicate, to me, > that they need to own the > > organization and repo's within it. >=20 > My understanding is that members can create repos (unless you specificall= y > disable that). >=20 > But it is also the case that you can't do things like enable CI without > being an owner. So I'm inclined to more strongly recommend ownership by > chairs. Chairs that don't own the org can always ask for support, but I > see no reason not to have this more decentralized and to give chairs more > autonomy (that is the practice today and that works well). >=20 > So... >=20 > > GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner. The > owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area > Directors and the IETF Secretariat. Working Group chairs and Area > Directors in the area SHOULD also be included as owners. Area Directors > MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an owner. An organization MUS= T > have at least 2 owners. From nobody Thu Mar 19 05:28:29 2020 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 3B5CB3A2888 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 05:28:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 x9kesAOCEGEy for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 05:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (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 9D6B23A2885 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 05:28:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049463.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02JCLcY1014648; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:28:16 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2yuk7v9g2r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:28:15 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 02JCSECU002726; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:28:15 -0400 Received: from zlp30483.vci.att.com (zlp30483.vci.att.com [135.47.91.189]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 02JCSAr1002616 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:28:10 -0400 Received: from zlp30483.vci.att.com (zlp30483.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30483.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 69BE740145BA; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:28:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.153]) by zlp30483.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 539C540145A5; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:28:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGEX1CE.ITServices.sbc.com (135.50.89.112) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com (130.8.218.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:28:09 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGEX1CB.ITServices.sbc.com (135.50.89.109) by GAALPA1MSGEX1CE.ITServices.sbc.com (135.50.89.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:28:09 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGEX1CB.ITServices.sbc.com ([135.50.89.109]) by GAALPA1MSGEX1CB.ITServices.sbc.com ([135.50.89.109]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:28:09 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "'Martin Thomson'" , "'Salz, Rich'" , "'Rob Wilton (rwilton)'" CC: "'ietf-and-github@ietf.org,'" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fPUVLQPV08jkWLNooVVn8v5KhLhECAgADvHQCAAKejAIAATLIAgAABkoCAAAMjgIABKCeAgAAfMgCAABhlgIAABUsAgABOtoCAALsUYA== Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:28:09 +0000 Message-ID: <8e3b175870334c5aa26660ef53e21056@att.com> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.198.49] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-19_03:2020-03-19, 2020-03-19 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003190057 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 19 Mar 2020 12:28:29 -0000 > From: Martin Thomson >=20 > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020, at 03:30, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > Isn't that a split between organizational owner vs admins? > > > > I could well be wrong here. HOWEVER, it seems likely that the WG > > chair will be creating the organization, and therefore be an owner. > > There's lots of room for customization and tweaks (GitHub > > bikeshedding?), and the draft doesn't suggest how to do *everything.* > > Tools like Martin's, or my scripts, help codify things, but the WG > > chair still has, rightly so, a great deal of leverage to set up the GH > > organization as they see fit. Those things together indicate, to me, t= hat > they need to own the > > organization and repo's within it. >=20 > My understanding is that members can create repos (unless you specificall= y > disable that). >=20 > But it is also the case that you can't do things like enable CI without b= eing an > owner. So I'm inclined to more strongly recommend ownership by chairs. > Chairs that don't own the org can always ask for support, but I see no re= ason > not to have this more decentralized and to give chairs more autonomy (tha= t > is the practice today and that works well). >=20 > So... >=20 > > GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner. The > owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area > Directors and the IETF Secretariat. Working Group chairs and Area Direct= ors > in the area SHOULD also be included as owners. Area Directors MAY also > designate a delegate that becomes an owner. An organization MUST have at > least 2 owners. Thanks. I was getting a bit worried with suggestions that Chairs were only = "MAY". In my experience, Chairs are the ones who end up doing most of the w= ork managing and overseeing the GitHub account. The Secretariat and ADs are= or should be just for continuity. Barbara From nobody Thu Mar 19 06:46:19 2020 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 0EA443A294E for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 06:46:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 kZvFFp83Kn6q for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 06:46:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 A6A0B3A29A1 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 06:46:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050093.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02JDdZl2028507; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 13:46:07 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=ssuFf0mpZ9SwEP9jQGPxiykol/cRu7e5SCLvzUNBqjA=; b=WEdIjwN5h7YOGmV7YYIOw8P5twxESnkkVWY6knOCJnP686kxKYT1UPdDgXzoQ6d70DyO ixlofJH4jFNp0rB46oqLc4MPlZPlZATE1do1CrUgmLq2KXYQD8ZmPTeh8NAlONJKO2QU vKC0UDPCvChdFzZXJM1QoSSHiNTHUqF3c9DB0Le3qBYnIH/iXG4Xet8R62wQMgxMJkAH cdIgs/Z31/A2qqwdOuY8qDqV90ooi1oUgcORhnFh9/5PePsZ1BBOXWU7zEBf6GELCfrv wnzdYYm9aH1clWo0DPOLqTmaR9opkMUrEQsFV50k+6MjdBRyNQ8KkO7nUAEPjNrsXswh ZA== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [184.51.33.19] (may be forged)) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2yrqduq5fs-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 13:46:07 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02JDWHjw014217; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:46:06 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.57]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrtkvpw6t-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:46:05 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:46:05 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:46:05 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: "STARK, BARBARA H" , 'Martin Thomson' , "'Rob Wilton (rwilton)'" CC: "'ietf-and-github@ietf.org,'" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs Thread-Index: AQHV+0fLpgVLWAg4aEiFanXBcfrtZKhLQTKAgAEyKwCAAKejAIAATLIA//++g4CAAEYygIABKCeA///cIwCAAFt0gP//wj0AABI4m4AAIAFBgP//0riA Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 13:46:05 +0000 Message-ID: <7D20D9E4-8850-4240-9FB3-85871537D970@akamai.com> References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> <8e3b175870334c5aa26660ef53e21056@att.com> In-Reply-To: <8e3b175870334c5aa26660ef53e21056@att.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.118.63] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-19_04:2020-03-19, 2020-03-19 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=784 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003190060 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-19_04:2020-03-19, 2020-03-19 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=748 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003190061 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 19 Mar 2020 13:46:17 -0000 PiAgIFRoYW5rcy4gSSB3YXMgZ2V0dGluZyBhIGJpdCB3b3JyaWVkIHdpdGggc3VnZ2VzdGlvbnMg dGhhdCBDaGFpcnMgd2VyZSBvbmx5ICJNQVkiLiBJbiBteSBleHBlcmllbmNlLCBDaGFpcnMgYXJl IHRoZSBvbmVzIHdobyBlbmQgdXAgZG9pbmcgbW9zdCBvZiB0aGUgd29yayBtYW5hZ2luZyBhbmQg b3ZlcnNlZWluZyB0aGUgR2l0SHViIGFjY291bnQuIFRoZSBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCBhbmQgQURzIGFy ZSBvciBzaG91bGQgYmUganVzdCBmb3IgY29udGludWl0eS4NCiAgDQpTdHJvbmdseSBhZ3JlZSEN Cg0K From nobody Thu Mar 19 08:10:18 2020 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 7E2BA3A03F3; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:10:08 -0700 (PDT) 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, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=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=nokia.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 o2NGUqS63msD; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:10:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EUR05-DB8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db8eur05on2113.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.20.113]) (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 0E83F3A0366; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:10:06 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=BjWlF+SJ39ATiKrE/l2y5fxSjs9/sMDC1+oeddGO8xsvvIG2/2fpltDBBEDyHwUkHltPy68aeGCnbVcDUoAIWpDuR62IoVQg3RtI+Zzgvm2tvlaexMTYLKD6y9hkw9uMqZVZx04i0rx1eOCM+fuMDobw4b3BDuTnmdAd2W/BRn1yoBzB/BANteyStxxZZBBdOpAF9FhHqNrP+/ZK4mKGrEW3REvF6eRqzjp9JE5PbJSGb74h4yC18l5TiT8xpMLkH1bWIacjN8rIut6L26hF0P/vT5gRFM9YmNpuxJ2Ghzezz2xhhZmod2ad26RSHuxeYYl3fQcuiklAy7wrg0i6fA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=R/HtcdivAqiTmRdydhXwRzVms5q5HvDndo199ZUdFCU=; b=W5Kemj87KV0PKD4nFKC5xkdGoSqESQvUQOQIGXDSS+8Jlnwgb1L6rnZx9Yps5KLJehahhTMHJCdZ91Vfn0SkLv9yzZmB2ziMCjxJej5OEHbQLzdY0S3o5HObKoTAgFZNSgICNCyGXMgJRq92Mc1zb+308Bt46OGVV/C7WA4O48C952uL9v+I1oeiKJ6z/Gf08tGpnzzwRc7M+HqRt6404JFZCNKq9XJIQ86oYBgrvxnzXbV+GmcfTJu3+PqNkzKm3DyvtAq6C0iy3GEkKxiCuj1ae77P+9DmTwM1mUwZfLOliPpel+ZoyfndLz8izcG8dMROEN89E+Mngu8V0dj17w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nokia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nokia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nokia.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nokia.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-nokia-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=R/HtcdivAqiTmRdydhXwRzVms5q5HvDndo199ZUdFCU=; b=dWBY64Pto34yQn+tn7bgFYkLfwl7NEnR/oee0LQNLb8w9rfcI8t2PkvyF10BM7kF+8gLyNOwkz3afL0uXCpc2PpMfrnhPUJVv9zxbIosVlk4j3RQQ4aQ+6itD27+bd5YYnwpkpd/US1Y5UDOfuZE4R8jZacWlbrFQrva9bASYgg= Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=martin.vigoureux@nokia.com; Received: from DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (52.134.96.142) by DB7PR07MB4988.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.178.42.222) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2835.12; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:10:04 +0000 Received: from DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::e4c2:7b1f:f7a1:8bd9]) by DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::e4c2:7b1f:f7a1:8bd9%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2835.017; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:10:04 +0000 To: Martin Thomson , The IESG Cc: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood References: <158401082788.18076.104688218811852864@ietfa.amsl.com> <9322ba71-dd46-4c8c-aca5-78928c631e19@www.fastmail.com> <4bb03592-21be-51a2-28e7-14f23969fbb4@nokia.com> From: Martin Vigoureux Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:10:02 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: PR2P264CA0017.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:101::29) To DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:5:1::14) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from [172.30.2.230] (131.228.2.20) by PR2P264CA0017.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:101::29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2835.19 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:10:03 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [131.228.2.20] X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-HT: Tenant X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: e867e550-0e76-4023-4cca-08d7cc179a8a X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: DB7PR07MB4988: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:9508; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0347410860 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4636009)(136003)(346002)(376002)(39860400002)(366004)(396003)(199004)(54906003)(110136005)(4326008)(478600001)(66946007)(966005)(4744005)(66556008)(956004)(86362001)(66476007)(31696002)(31686004)(26005)(186003)(36756003)(16576012)(2616005)(316002)(2906002)(6486002)(5660300002)(16526019)(52116002)(8676002)(81166006)(81156014)(44832011)(8936002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB7PR07MB4988; H:DB7PR07MB4140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: nokia.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: o8KzJFnO78tfYIHyOn0KiiWvHyJsA2HIOc0ZnWc1zBQrBMWdK2/tzXMb4BZ+IBkvzNRkQz9lJYlQyZT/J1n/A7dmTBYJLJxs+354Fley/W4Yy/5FLrLqBoCK88wLuvyZtgLMO5kw8hGsPnalUhhQ6w== X-OriginatorOrg: nokia.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e867e550-0e76-4023-4cca-08d7cc179a8a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Mar 2020 15:10:04.6802 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 5d471751-9675-428d-917b-70f44f9630b0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: 7rAu+phkykJ/Exwd7RX3ttv2bdz6GW1n+vqev1MdmrnSBzNtOvZ3HpmBE4Q0dAKTNZ0ACwhbJb0dO4DxHBP62PknTONs/voJ/eT9YOcqouE= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB7PR07MB4988 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 19 Mar 2020 15:10:09 -0000 Thank you Martin -m Le 2020-03-16 à 1:38, Martin Thomson a écrit : > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 23:32, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >> Ideally I would have also liked s/Each Working Group/The Working Group/ >> but I agree with you that the new sentence does the job of setting the >> context in which to read the document. > > My bad. I missed that with so much stuff going on. > > https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/54 does this. I might have to tweak that again based on the results of merging other changes, but I hope that this helps. > From nobody Thu Mar 19 14:42:15 2020 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 131803A1032 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:42:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.077 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.077 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=QnWd1cF1; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=3E3Zs2JN 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 fU0TzQMmsU22 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:41:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51D023A103F for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:41:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1B15C0184; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:41:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:41:47 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=pUmSoPVA/zu6pr6CJwK6INJnVbLL VdOrVxZTUxy/qyM=; b=QnWd1cF18b8QUp6867wZvtVY/f6xkMexBZqwxLuFOyhD l6sMh4QR5+QsPKn2JmUP6sNjXmf+vIesIZH3+seQPyNwnqtMUv8zXGcPbdO8woIw KM9Vjq3AX1vyKhanN9jKkC5E65kZNjCVuDn7c9uDksB83Wb0h9OUvaOuDK6SdwZd OETnJYxhMAmt10Lr28WcNClJAMKNnfmf+VAX+oROcckrgPba4he//vPnPDeai7s9 ADYBr/faK2prYDX2ts+Lw3oSJ8c0ql4SiCVdWycTaiV7XrfVuUMR7EtAG7XiuNyg B8UlJceIJBHmd1Oo7DRlqLqSAoYClM1DfiBzheJbPw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=pUmSoP VA/zu6pr6CJwK6INJnVbLLVdOrVxZTUxy/qyM=; b=3E3Zs2JNNnbMd9u1Ou7go1 zMzJTpxrgcP8DqeWstSJvBp8NPMrSUaUaE1+VeaeS/KzGIPaY1PTVS08Zs/NRjd4 au9T7yWZ5ITGEPu8OHhuWdgXkdcf+7A+oUTuHQjNXVza89hfiVVw+SckuNrOOHbi 9KYO7rHlvwDzWd7hovAvpSxT8cbAAFWEOlEi2b5B2OLgZ1iVU5Q9PVLARwm6J4+O 6NLEfSvUm+zuiF+n6T97ZuxQAQxvs8DZKuQGriRo1wUdIgsjamYEyuJ9JMfhzcej AVLdwJrMCoeNDM3BpiMpO6Viat8KxJuoozzQkQCpUKcT5Ii4iz2yxZghpLnlxqrw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefledgudegiecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc evlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhho figvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 9290BE00C2; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:41:47 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-1021-g152deaf-fmstable-20200319v1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <7ff07289-553d-4a1c-b809-eb488824b47e@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <26230b6d-d241-40d9-9290-0c91fdb8e88e@www.fastmail.com> <6E4AF1D6-F071-45D4-B613-8D74822134F1@akamai.com> <99DC08EB-DC03-4E83-9F9C-307ACA684FF3@akamai.com> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 08:41:28 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" , "Salz, Rich" Cc: "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 19 Mar 2020 21:42:13 -0000 I'll take that suggestion. I will mention other ADs as a possible delegate, which demotes that recommendation to a MAY. With that, I think we're in a good place. I will ship a revision with all the changes from AD review. On Thu, Mar 19, 2020, at 08:30, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > I'm okay with this. > > I still have a preference to make non responsible ADs in the area a MAY > rather than a SHOULD ... but I won't lose sleep over it. > > Regards, > Rob > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Martin Thomson > > Sent: 18 March 2020 21:12 > > To: Salz, Rich ; Rob Wilton (rwilton) > > > > Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, > > Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs > > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020, at 03:30, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > > Isn't that a split between organizational owner vs admins? > > > > > > I could well be wrong here. HOWEVER, it seems likely that the WG > > > chair will be creating the organization, and therefore be an owner. > > > There's lots of room for customization and tweaks (GitHub > > > bikeshedding?), and the draft doesn't suggest how to do *everything.* > > > Tools like Martin's, or my scripts, help codify things, but the WG > > > chair still has, rightly so, a great deal of leverage to set up the GH > > > organization as they see fit. Those things together indicate, to me, > > that they need to own the > > > organization and repo's within it. > > > > My understanding is that members can create repos (unless you specifically > > disable that). > > > > But it is also the case that you can't do things like enable CI without > > being an owner. So I'm inclined to more strongly recommend ownership by > > chairs. Chairs that don't own the org can always ask for support, but I > > see no reason not to have this more decentralized and to give chairs more > > autonomy (that is the practice today and that works well). > > > > So... > > > > > GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner. The > > owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area > > Directors and the IETF Secretariat. Working Group chairs and Area > > Directors in the area SHOULD also be included as owners. Area Directors > > MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an owner. An organization MUST > > have at least 2 owners. > From nobody Thu Mar 19 15:19:51 2020 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 ED4A53A10E3; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:19:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.121.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org Message-ID: <158465638664.15714.14353376321434312101@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:19:46 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] I-D Action: draft-ietf-git-using-github-06.txt X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 19 Mar 2020 22:19:48 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the GitHub Integration and Tooling WG of the IETF. Title : Working Group GitHub Usage Guidance Authors : Martin Thomson Barbara Stark Filename : draft-ietf-git-using-github-06.txt Pages : 23 Date : 2020-03-19 Abstract: This document provides a set of guidelines for Working Groups that choose to use GitHub for their work. Note to Readers Discussion of this document takes place on the GitHub@ietf mailing list (ietf-and-github@ietf.org), which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search?email_list=ietf-and-github. Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-using-github-06 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-git-using-github-06 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-git-using-github-06 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Thu Mar 19 21:51:46 2020 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 5E9433A1582; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:51:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=ZbtD5K6D; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=1kdTblaP 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 tIQPV7W8h_vb; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:51:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 441F03A157E; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:51:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4B92EA; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 00:51:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 00:51:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:date:from:to:subject:content-type; s= fm1; bh=CSAXBnWNqeH363Ry7i+QyMONocQF+yMqAVv39C/iwKs=; b=ZbtD5K6D R/p6sDV1KVGum6K4wyhzg41LKGZNVGbnPvC6qfdtOEzf2q7GZfyEsPldkB5GfvOO JedC+taq+VYixGAhByBARvymWPZj36Y8NobAH+j9fx3BVW+MqVXJBam4utV1vzZD XSYjfEe4Ff4WRO0O+hoxr8ZrNah9P3He27O2R85rf/0rpf0p1C8DQxvOqj4ZZ3o4 jbkTgg+dpm3rU5aTQ6lsZ/l0HcAPXGdxterx3NUWI7o7vZCGvXsQ38SWaD0zswA9 tL81uoL7DeOjQHbpZiAKDWuUQsXPZX/HdNVz8ZFU9OLjfObeMx46X10B2Zvs1WKo KQLDBAYwucNzpg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=CSAXBnWNqeH363Ry7i+QyMONocQF+ yMqAVv39C/iwKs=; b=1kdTblaPkyMccWAkyZM+FQotPMmCH8vNoCaD4Jd8zoKOj 0uWoopUTQsGVd6JpbOuUIdCGvzDED3QwChLsctW8rvq6SeAD8AIqpuf+M14bXk8m Pi+CSM1BucpWRwsaY6KMGLemJ3OK2yN2ViapDku7Ly1xSSiRrIl1FJdrBwaijknm CmXQ5SI8qpZ4x3/aiq21rswvwKvRZxvkXpQmH8LyuygZjYzrv3jFfQjjBN+2DJWG ZuO3sM2Svc1hZoOWx9UMpn72GuSHNldDHirnmRQ8+RPWSht0XlGCxzweLCJtTLxN M2RhvZxyegQBcUrTlLW6XU8plh62qzbdMfOLRydIg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudegtddgjeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfffhffvufgtsehttdertd erredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgrrhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigv nhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhquhhitg ifghdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhr ohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 9222AE00F6; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 00:51:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-1021-g152deaf-fmstable-20200319v1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <6c820473-d7ab-47c5-885b-56ea519ebefc@www.fastmail.com> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:51:14 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, wgchairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Tools for GitHub backups X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 04:51:40 -0000 In case folks here are interested. The toolchain I maintain (https://github.com/martinthomson/i-d-template) now has a better backup for issues and pull requests. If you have CI enabled, this creates a snapshot of the issues and pull requests (thanks to Mike Bishop for navigating the API here) and saves a copy alongside the HTML and text versions of the draft. This archive is a JSON file that is pretty easy to read, even without tools. Saving to the repo means that anyone who has a copy of the repo will have a copy of this archive. The archive is only created when changes are made to the repo, though that has been OK in the past, there are plans to run the update on a timer instead. You can see an example of a *large* database with the QUIC repo. This takes a fair bit to download - it's a 19M database uncompressed - and it can be a little slow to sort and do other things. But it should give you an idea of what is possible. It might not be as fully featured as the real GitHub interface, but I find that it can be useful for some things. https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/issues.html Cheers, Martin From nobody Fri Mar 20 07:28:55 2020 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 15A433A0C29; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:28:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.089 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-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 9A9-_LYywZTV; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:28:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 22CF23A0C02; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:27:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050102.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02KE6jpw019225; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 14:27:42 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=7tmvjsfl9BU2cKAjHPnOWNXf1UDwvv633M9/hpAhe4w=; b=c9e1x/BC3LQUwEaPf08X6leMBaoHHkKME152bc0myHBz3UIJLEXhmXB1ZRoDKfkRl01S rx8L7OFMuUDGPd0vOQpR7mVISTczttgN5vsryzaFfK4wxoJq9VoZvRBGfz+TBgDiSbNs z7Sd6aiHzH5nOFElxRwY+108v9nnHNfjxH2Rserr0f6T/8pTwQLEH6AMdGpkiJxofQVf LinlbPzv2HrPEyXfBSHQND3rBbjP3YFqvMcr39JNCE7DAAxPWMdElIKyU9YSEKn3Erq2 LAF9oa8SD7lItwq/EYS1tHSMesPrhSkRCzI0X5BkXi+qqGXbPHNgd32tguPJUikIj+IU NA== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [184.51.33.19] (may be forged)) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2yv6m6ds0k-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 14:27:42 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02KE3Lvn002382; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:27:42 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.57]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2yrtkvtehk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:27:41 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:27:40 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:27:40 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , "wgchairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Tools for GitHub backups Thread-Index: AQHV/nNDEcNuTK7KeEmmieiunIfXXqhRioUA Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 14:27:40 +0000 Message-ID: References: <6c820473-d7ab-47c5-885b-56ea519ebefc@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6c820473-d7ab-47c5-885b-56ea519ebefc@www.fastmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.118.63] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <3F56254277E0C54894F2D1CA260234D3@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-20_04:2020-03-20, 2020-03-20 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=868 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003200059 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-20_04:2020-03-20, 2020-03-20 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=842 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003200059 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Tools for GitHub backups X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 14:28:54 -0000 PiAgICBUaGUgdG9vbGNoYWluIEkgbWFpbnRhaW4gKGh0dHBzOi8vZ2l0aHViLmNvbS9tYXJ0aW50 aG9tc29uL2ktZC10ZW1wbGF0ZSkgbm93IGhhcyBhIGJldHRlciBiYWNrdXAgZm9yIGlzc3VlcyBh bmQgcHVsbCByZXF1ZXN0cy4NCiAgDQpJIGhhdmVuJ3QgbG9va2VkLCBzb3JyeS4gIERvZXMgaXQg YWxzbyBkbyBsYWJlbHM/ICBJZiBzbywgdGhlbiB0aGlzIHNlZW1zIGxpa2UgaXQgZG9lcyBldmVy eXRoaW5nIG5lZWRlZCB0byBwcmFjdGljYWxseSBiYWNrdXAgdGhlIHN0YXRlIG9mIGEgV0cgcmVw b3NpdG9yeSwgcmlnaHQ/ICBBbmQgdGhlIHNlY3JldGFyaWF0IG9ubHkgbmVlZHMgdG8gY2xvbmUg cmVwbydzPw0KDQo= From nobody Fri Mar 20 07:37:01 2020 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 160DB3A09F8; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:36:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.079 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.079 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=heapingbits.net header.b=plcsjbtI; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=QJl5g4xc 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 KUSs9vtyFE9O; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E45A3A0F17; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:34:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35765C00EA; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:34:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap4 ([10.202.2.54]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:34:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heapingbits.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm3; bh=Py 8cArvAKAD3cuHEeRBstDyEQW5qKaHFUAaPHNr0Q7c=; b=plcsjbtIev8hhaNJDa s9pK16r47rpH9XH498ehlI1z3vYw8XpY66zTjhKwpgZ1/NYTe3fzF6Ne9hB8UvBG YGz21Rzsf7hmEgc6+6W7uc7cWQfuSoNsf2usPnyJWQBGIxJlxmSf6G0gbDd3V/6d T1VyhQB+HcYtoanvO9Ai2IE+6Kf9RJBwRM7KBjD6d13Idc7TFFHsgg+hqJd5Ufud 9TFYVlEkknAw/x3dDhoJR+Wv11xMtgszGopEVYZp/yIMeXrpRPv0mNaH4OaHltYD /+3I6247DRWsWC9bepzkHaaXR3nYgmRKqXaO7gduVf8DV+87Ik7pm3188TZPbcqN YE+w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Py8cArvAKAD3cuHEeRBstDyEQW5qKaHFUAaPHNr0Q 7c=; b=QJl5g4xcg7auNoA47zTYfz34oTPZec0QoJT7yuhNrV9+wzQtaZo1vgOYG exN4KN4YO4kFShQzlMZO7aQul0O+kFdY0eH849XIJaw3oEMLvx2Cmhew6vwiYwHW yS9VecXTYg6gmuuOfAYH/ftsu48JtLQ2EYWPbfvDebrDFVcXSk943bGPeuwBpLWX PGFZTTDgzHPDV+m8ExQ4/c9sSHgcIbsB0LYGuTOK6n1xoc6PGhY62K/ov3tuVTwn rQbb1B5Qk2PO1FHtGX2ISOeRHbjsJx5BYg57H0GM5u8oia9EJx+OyRLGXYBwAKPU ruws9LKSU72ZAObFjVa1+HzibgvYA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudeguddgieehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfvehh rhhishhtohhphhgvrhcuhghoohgufdcuoegtrgifsehhvggrphhinhhgsghithhsrdhnvg htqeenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptden ucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheptggrfieshhgvrghpihhnghgsihhtshdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 69CB73C00A1; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:34:32 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-1021-g152deaf-fmstable-20200319v1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <41b038cb-ca1f-43d7-975a-6efc72bb6e64@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5645321C-A644-4A93-B43F-D23F680DDD7A@mnot.net> References: <5645321C-A644-4A93-B43F-D23F680DDD7A@mnot.net> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:34:12 -0700 From: "Christopher Wood" To: "Mark Nottingham" , "Brian E Carpenter" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?q?Propose_changing_draft-ietf-git-usin?= =?utf-8?q?g-github_from_BCP_to_Informational?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 14:37:00 -0000 Hearing little pushback, we're moving forward with this document as info= rmational. We can always re-publish this as a BCP later on should that b= e deemed necessary. Thanks, Chris On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 2:09 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >=20 >=20 > Sent from my iPhone >=20 > > On 14 Mar 2020, at 6:20 am, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > >=20 > > =EF=BB=BFHi, > >=20 > > I disagree that it is a minor or inconsequential change. It means th= at it is no longer a set of rules that a WG must follow if they choose t= o use GitHub. It just becomes some non-binding suggestions. >=20 > That is what this group is chartered to produce.=20 >=20 > >=20 > > This has conseqences for the text, starting with the Abstract: > >=20 > >> This document describes best practices ... > >=20 > > needs to be something like > >=20 > > This document describes suggested guidelines ... > >=20 > > Then delete section 1.5 and lower-case all the RFC2119 keywords, to = avoid confusion. >=20 > That=E2=80=99s already started; see the editors=E2=80=99 copy.=20 >=20 > > More seriously, we would lose the normative value of this: > >=20 > >> In addition to Working Group policies, notices on repositories MU= ST > >> include citations for the IETF Note Well (https://www.ietf.org/ab= out/ > >> note-well/). > >=20 > > which really should be mandatory. Also this: > >=20 > >> All repositories for Working Group documents within the Working G= roup > >> organization MUST be public. =20 > >=20 > > I haven't re-read the whole draft. There may be other things as well= that are also important and not necessarily implied by RFC2418 already.= So I do not agree to the change of proposed status. > >=20 > > Regards > > Brian Carpenter > >=20 > >> On 14-Mar-20 02:48, Christopher Wood wrote: > >> During last call, some folks suggested draft-ietf-git-using-github = is better suited as an Informational rather than BCP document. This seem= s like a minor and inconsequential change, though I'd like to hear from = the WG to understand if folks object. To that end, if you disagree with = this change, can you please let us know why? > >>=20 > >> Thanks! > >> Chris > >>=20 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Ietf-and-github mailing list > >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > >>=20 > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github >=20 > From nobody Fri Mar 20 07:40:22 2020 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 E71513A0C3F; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:40:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.879 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, 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 0qWfeQvKcYJA; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:39:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D73943A0CB5; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.217.147] (p548DCD70.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.205.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48kRGQ0MSrzyWd; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:38:22 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <6c820473-d7ab-47c5-885b-56ea519ebefc@www.fastmail.com> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:38:21 +0100 Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, wgchairs@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 606407901.573716-bddd218c1837f2e5aa747a2fd1762af7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <6c820473-d7ab-47c5-885b-56ea519ebefc@www.fastmail.com> To: Martin Thomson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Tools for GitHub backups X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 14:40:14 -0000 On 2020-03-20, at 05:51, Martin Thomson wrote: >=20 > snapshot of the issues Including the discussion? Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Fri Mar 20 07:50:23 2020 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 60C403A09BD; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:49:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=vYpgPCq1; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=BhNnRfkC 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 i21nr8mWKK8Z; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:49:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB5C3A09B8; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:48:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2188E5C0203; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:48:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:48:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=M 786l40LhTfUGNbjBB0qcr3iK88OUMVQnEVo3YvnHes=; b=vYpgPCq1GCe8x4cin 7j+Zct7d2rNMY8uqd114Z2wvjweTI2Ni2h923r0Vy8OXKn724Ow2t9AaA9E7UASD oD2bCiFLQdrmy+uGd+DlZG031iwMVFTIu1yg7uQT6Pb+4DDwsCsvJQXOAMruOTNC NOPqipgHym9UOlvjyQlcdcWMFA5SeXi5XjdMSrW5u8n8XmBxCRGl5RI9Hutq8ITv TiUGaNcfv7w/oyIHkjM40KrrHTvPkOTgWRX6wSVSXHvMA9AmGIA1Us1bWns9DDXY lkBONRjQiGQGKxZAI2UmpGndltLzSRPOsoIVnTVaZezMV55qgMKGcMD2JSzwYPe8 JEICg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=M786l40LhTfUGNbjBB0qcr3iK88OUMVQnEVo3YvnH es=; b=BhNnRfkCpNrEMFty78+4R3BV0jw+ywt5jX+UyowekJUPShAaUfCytS0oq B4EK0chqQww/Dz18b3kX+Vs7V6oJHiscVwt1mJJrngULDG0VFieNQXP3rvv+Nzd2 v1iK+YakWM9KlF855ipTVhBtarpTSrnI30r2g7vW3Annntz3uZNOrtAAn9vilVoS 1Pgo1MymPWtxjWPq9Xa4qWFQlPkKYy8hdrrCpRYXKNHmOFRLR6XH1wfhAuKdkuYl M0kpX29NMcpKmEbguOuWfP23r//56pvKU34YhV3QrFN/3xDkgjeez+HR82Mj47T0 q9fN+bWPcrBl+gp+FJWJ10S61IRjQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudeguddgieejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqh hmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhishhsrgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegt ohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepuddtke drhedurddutddurdelkeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgr ihhlfhhrohhmpegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhn X-ME-Proxy: Received: from alcoop-m-c46z.fios-router.home (pool-108-51-101-98.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.51.101.98]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6FBD83280067; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:48:55 -0400 Cc: IESG , draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, Christopher Wood Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0B459F07-A301-4F75-8BE4-97D3372727C9@cooperw.in> References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Alvaro Retana X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 14:49:41 -0000 FYI, the status of this document was changed to informational. Alissa > On Mar 11, 2020, at 2:53 PM, Alvaro Retana via Datatracker = wrote: >=20 > Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Discuss >=20 > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut = this > introductory paragraph, however.) >=20 >=20 > Please refer to = https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >=20 >=20 > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ >=20 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > This is a process DISCUSS. I don't believe the status of this = document as a > BCP belonging to BCP 25 was discussed in the WG or with the IETF = community. >=20 > The Charter for the git WG only explicitly mentions BCP 9: >=20 > The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet = Standards > Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it. Whether = working > groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support = their work > will remain entirely at their discretion. >=20 > However, including this document as a part of BCP 25 (IETF Working = Group > Guidelines and Procedures) results in the interpretation that it = represents > consensus on how WGs should proceed -- and not that the decision "to = use GitHub > or the documented policies...[is]...entirely at their discretion." >=20 > My reading of the mailing list is that the current RFC Editor note (in = which > appending the document to BCP 25 is requested) was added only after = the topic > was brought up in the Genart LC review. [Did I miss the discussion?] >=20 > IOW, both (1) the process of reaching the conclusion that this = document belongs > in BCP 25, and (2) the concept that this document would be part of BCP = 25, are > the subject of my DISCUSS. I would like for the IESG to discuss = this topic. >=20 > Not expecting this document to be part of BCP 25, or having an = explicit > discussion with the community about it, would lead me to clear my = DISCUSS. >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D > [Non blocking comment. I'm including it here because it is related to = the > status of the document.] >=20 > This document would be very good Informational document. >=20 > I am not a regular GitHub user (and none of the WGs I'm responsible = for use it > as part of their process), but I have no reason to doubt that the text > represents what is believed to be the best way to use GitHub within = the IETF > process. However, the designation as a BCP can create confusion. = [Again, this > is a non-blocking comment.] >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 >=20 > (0) I share Warren's concerns. >=20 > (1) The datatracker should list draft-thomson-git-using-github as = being > replaced by this document. >=20 > (2) It would be nice to have a short terminology section; I assume = many people > reading this document will not already be GitHub-savy, so push, pull, = commits, > may not be familiar to them. Alternatively, an Informational pointer = to a > tutorial would also be ok. >=20 > (3) Personally, I don't have an issue with the use of GitHub, but some = of the > statements in the Introduction sound like marketing blurbs, for = example: >=20 > - "Use of this service has been found to reduce the time that Working = Groups > need to produce documents and to improve the quality of the final = result." >=20 > - "...encourage contributions from a larger set of contributors." >=20 > - "Using GitHub can also broaden the community of contributors for a > specification." >=20 > (4) [nit] s/This is problematic for contributors who do not track = discussion > closely./This is problematic for contributors who do not track = discussions > closely. >=20 > (5) [major] =C2=A75.3: "Working Group chairs SHOULD confirm that the = Working Group > has consensus to adopt any process." When would the chairs not = confirm > consensus to adopt a process? IOW, why is this not a MUST? >=20 > Note that =C2=A73 says this: >=20 > Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining how to best > accomplish the charter objectives in an open and transparent = fashion. > The Working Group Chairs are responsible for determining if there is > interest in using GitHub and making a consensus call to determine if > the proposed policy and use is acceptable. >=20 > Even though this text doesn't use rfc2119 keywords, my impression of = the intent > is that it is required for the chairs to make the consensus call. = IOW, I think > that this text and the one above (from =C2=A75.3) are in conflict. >=20 > (6) =C2=A75.3.2: >=20 > Gaining Working Group consensus about the resolution of issues can = be > done in the abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the > outcome of discussions as they see fit. >=20 > This sentence doesn't sound right to me: "consensus...can be done in = the > abstract, with editors being permitted to capture the outcome...as = they see > fit". That last part doesn't sound right: Chairs call consensus. = Maybe I'm > misinterpreting... >=20 > (7) [major]. Why is draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration listed as a > Normative Reference? I don't think that dependency is needed. >=20 >=20 >=20 From nobody Fri Mar 20 07:57:59 2020 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 2055E3A09DF; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:57:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.637 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.637 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8XevZ0j9tBe0; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:57:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-il1-f175.google.com (mail-il1-f175.google.com [209.85.166.175]) (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 BF16C3A0A58; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:56:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-f175.google.com with SMTP id h3so5853657ils.3; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:56:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XZ4YtJqyCyCeJDFdQe8pT2Tul5tlcwOTh7wzmfBxiEc=; b=CvwKlFOWiXUMYQrl2sAqTZvsGCQKj7HUVwutEh5kK+Vyn6//U7Ym1xO9YSnVUKQFtr xWHWlVJ7xkRkSNqsvY2LFaoy18DGSvTZ0NM7tkXv7xbpwFcdmKSg2tE3J4GH3/5uwU22 rfmyPgUKM/4myJnP5UcSqlPEQZ/pVo6PpSUUk+ic4svQrsCIomCyUY342Hyni+Wk6tOx iZHs9b+yjGJruXJv9ecC9hgL4Hc+wy+/lcNkWrXtJfXf/0mjfWE+1UzzDP0vWuwLRv2i 2Aq8EuUcb5AGyTN8u6LayvkyGX98J/w16F8xPplEK9E5hWJ0etmiPe1tKElo2cdEPgyk c+7A== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ37zTsJbnCVtfiByvds3I+Y5Ce/mwY//NjFzxUQys63yLviibOL l+643ItqZGnEe8LjJhEyv42b3HL3gvHMyHRBR21W/A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuvTv9xkySg5JSG93P4tCd9imnEuAIeJllOAk0S96divr15rvjwl0XtXajkDrOU9aLtQnYINCGs7kElRaYzNtg= X-Received: by 2002:a92:9107:: with SMTP id t7mr8659384ild.140.1584716207116; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:56:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> <35046BE2-7120-492F-AE1C-DA74FA1AA2C8@icann.org> In-Reply-To: From: Barry Leiba Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:56:35 -0400 Message-ID: To: Mirja Kuehlewind Cc: Paul Hoffman , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , IESG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?b?W0V4dF0gTWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZCdzIERp?= =?utf-8?q?scuss_on_draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_D?= =?utf-8?q?ISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 14:57:43 -0000 Where are we on this DISCUSS? Barry On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 9:49 AM Mirja Kuehlewind wrot= e: > > Hi Paul, > > See inline. > > > On 11. Mar 2020, at 21:36, Paul Hoffman wrote: > > > > Catching up on the rest of Mirja's comments (not already discussed on t= his thread) > > > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------= -- > >>>> COMMENT: > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------= -- > >>>> > >>>> Other questions/comments: > >>>> > >>>> 1) Sec 2.3: > >>>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personnel = changes." > >>>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this senten= ce really > >>>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or G= itHub) and > >>>> what is should do? > > > > We will change "API" to "ability in the Datatracker=E2=80=9D. > > I=E2=80=99m still not sure what exactly is needed here? Can you maybe exp= lain what the idea is? > > > > >>>> > >>>> 2) Sec 2.5: > >>>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" > >>>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be maintain= ed within > >>>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or d= esirable: > >>>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which no= t? There > >>>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. > > > > Some chairs have indicated it is desirable, so the WG thought it should= be possible. > > Yes, I think this is a discussion for the other git draft. > > > > >>>> > >>>> 3) Also sec 2.5: > >>>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a > >>>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of a= n > >>>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new > >>>> repository within that organization for a single document." > >>>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit it= to the > >>>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does n= ot seems > >>>> too useful... > > > > Document authors can tell the WG chairs that they intend to create a ne= w WG draft. If that happens, the WG chair creates the repo with either the = intended draft name or something semantically relevant, and tells the docum= ent authors before they turn in the -00. (I think this has already happened= in some WGs=E2=80=A6) > > That's fine. But the cited text talks about a datatracker interface for t= hat. Not sure if that is the right approach. > > > > >>>> > >>>> 4) Sec 2.6: > >>>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." > >>>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you can = add link to > >>>> external pages? > > > > This is currently true for chairs for their WGs, but not for authors in= their document page. > > It was not clear to me that this was intended on the document level. I th= ink that should be clarified. How would that look like? Authors can add a G= itHub repo name or just any URL? Not sure if authors should do that or only= chairs on a per-document basis; might be different for individual drafts a= nd wg documents. > > Thanks! > Mirja > > > > > > > --Paul Hoffman > From nobody Fri Mar 20 08:56:52 2020 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 557213A0400; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 08:56:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=Xu5jiUvo; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=gJg7nR/7 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 xWRlDrmH72BE; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 08:56:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A72C3A0A5A; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 08:56:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9304; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1584719782; x=1585929382; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=tIX3/Ct8czF0/LJk/nwhrO4uigXY8JTQ/KeNfiMoM4o=; b=Xu5jiUvo4BIlT4iGSYYtglLPC/y4YIO41bLnCM1JT+JApKXPA9YsttxP Ie/TeduR2lDOXHOtvhV3pQC6k+bqr1FYxBbxc+xpH4eahmgoHq/jKNXRp xA9JzhBb9hySMdZXpwYKxScvDvw06ov/OwefC9d05y6kDHsI1BjiXjdRB E=; IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3ALtn3uRDPQgQ9GYb68NeZUyQJPHJ1sqjoPgMT9p?= =?us-ascii?q?ssgq5PdaLm5Zn5IUjD/qs13kTRU9Dd7PRJw6rNvqbsVHZIwK7JsWtKMfkuHw?= =?us-ascii?q?QAld1QmgUhBMCfDkiuIeD7aSc5EexJVURu+DewNk0GUMs=3D?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DiAQBa5nRe/4MNJK1mGwEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?FAQEBEQEBAwMBAQGBe4FUUAVsWCAECyqEGINFA4pwgjoliWqOMoFCgRADVAk?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEMAQEjCgIEAQGERAIXgg0kOBMCAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBQRthVYMhWMBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAgESEREMAQEqAgEKAQsEAgEIEQMBAgECAiYCAgIfERUICAIEAQ0FFA6DBAG?= =?us-ascii?q?CSwMOIAEOoX8CgTmIYnWBMoJ/AQEFgUNBgwgNC4IMAwaBDiqMLxqBQT+BESc?= =?us-ascii?q?MFIJNPoIbSQIBAgGBLAESASGDETKCLI18gjw7nmIyRAqCPIdYimoEhDgdgku?= =?us-ascii?q?IKpBgjwqJBYI2kCsCBAIEBQIOAQEFgWkiZ1gFDAhwFTsqAYJBUBgNjh0MFxW?= =?us-ascii?q?DO4UUhUF0AoEnjWkBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.72,285,1580774400"; d="scan'208";a="735874268" Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 20 Mar 2020 15:56:15 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (xch-rcd-001.cisco.com [173.37.102.11]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 02KFuFmY017919 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:56:15 GMT Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:56:14 -0500 Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 11:56:14 -0400 Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 11:56:13 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=WdsfFA7n1AqwaWWHSU4e93Pt0FSvZBpmB2E2b9Ry/PXbKQs5U5eCU9/EK3C+UGjb7IBR4ezYoQPvr8PD88/eXoqiOHX5O+U/DOmWM1Jv44jPDse4JXjZt4KLwWTGDAjvtAL0iSOlGxmOjDHBF4BZ/I6Is4QY7DYh8rOGM2Ga7qW/EG2F2kngE0EKZ0Yk0wWnRsiGrcLDt4iZbs6N/i8mtbTThSxGqUnGf7RX7ZXNWuzoiV9SpLxoHc/HVMQ8+5EzQX97zbw6x3aB+iRq3MmYijbASzFbkRqS6Uqrtn1+arIaZq44twSR2Cq7jWDo1aX3TRGtpaC1XKhnyNFZ/4MrOw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=tIX3/Ct8czF0/LJk/nwhrO4uigXY8JTQ/KeNfiMoM4o=; b=YNi9N8DqrgXrYmsHp7SSzZRB8M5NL0WGkVpFrKDVykZm2OL3PDeDAduxaZTh7tdiPmQ8qMZSXONDtAycaAsB9aCuaMc0BBG9CuMAEHRDFdfHfpTk0Bt4R7Bvpv322At41sf1aLHzETAbNEpxbZG46/rOZeZ/0W/nUB8MV9HK/AI2XhFtRfFm6AsGGeIxiJxaRkoIF7pZpy4A8DKeacHWgSeJCgosJUxz9n1CzwK0dQOHDT2KluFIAjBOb4/CbYNt4koHxoiAaDAMFwAbusW7ZKSrXOyk2O4EuevNb6LeF965eKjm4eH4uewEhC7qaq6lMTie+7YyYy6/M/FW+K8e+w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=tIX3/Ct8czF0/LJk/nwhrO4uigXY8JTQ/KeNfiMoM4o=; b=gJg7nR/77KqLbi4+q5uKvcwEMvJS5D1jkDw1Aae9HW8NHkMM2GuxfuqdWPyu1bqdE7TI7DMVWKCt241jxdWb5l6gc9fd3obVAFZ60jhSjOMK3Zpahpldd+4c8LVr/dHOyqd6VWH/dmjXuwaajfxY7msjQqzVtqHtRqBY/D3yyC0= Received: from DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:10d::13) by DM5PR11MB1322.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:d::12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2835.18; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:54:59 +0000 Received: from DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::680d:e22e:72d5:67ca]) by DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::680d:e22e:72d5:67ca%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2814.025; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:54:59 +0000 From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" To: Alissa Cooper , Alvaro Retana CC: "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , IESG , "git-chairs@ietf.org" , Christopher Wood Thread-Topic: Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHV/sbX+JAhRreilka6hVILokeMbqhRswUA Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:54:59 +0000 Message-ID: <5EA09047-A7AB-4414-9517-68C90417B75C@cisco.com> References: <158395281137.1671.933778421064897517@ietfa.amsl.com> <0B459F07-A301-4F75-8BE4-97D3372727C9@cooperw.in> In-Reply-To: <0B459F07-A301-4F75-8BE4-97D3372727C9@cooperw.in> Accept-Language: fr-BE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=evyncke@cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c1:36:6d6a:63f0:b113:dc19] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 03b5c34e-84e7-4291-7c33-08d7cce70b3b x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR11MB1322: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 03484C0ABF x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(366004)(376002)(39860400002)(136003)(396003)(346002)(199004)(53546011)(54906003)(81166006)(2616005)(66946007)(66556008)(66446008)(91956017)(76116006)(6512007)(71200400001)(186003)(66476007)(33656002)(64756008)(66574012)(6506007)(8936002)(5660300002)(6486002)(110136005)(478600001)(2906002)(8676002)(81156014)(316002)(36756003)(4326008)(966005)(86362001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR11MB1322; H:DM5PR11MB1753.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: L4mjguseVCLhTQUoYJqgamHFW1Yt72Cju3+4+P3GG0paBnyNH4u+GbGeBViPYoE+z4DG2Nu10mT5CksSlBmy+k8IyuYImsjLWOlOyz/iutiUAsidLsIpFvrraMtp+1oQGjVrpDrgaBvgmaSO6PDxC4iS1tCYLTgHbXSIiCL5N2RQQNWWU1eSfRzIu1L4Amb5WQTbP9/mek0HKSxi/KJ7iw== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <1EC238AB54A99B458F24DD5C10A0B5E2@namprd11.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 03b5c34e-84e7-4291-7c33-08d7cce70b3b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 20 Mar 2020 15:54:59.3284 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: Jdr0Cgz/b2w+4qGtfwpBZgISxrzAVYDevDse5WyPu3Vb1CKpjkL9YV7urGENn+kbUWuzxt+kiEnMvrZf7ngt7w== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR11MB1322 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.11, xch-rcd-001.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-1.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 15:56:30 -0000 QSB2ZXJ5IGdvb2QgYW5kIHdpc2UgY2hhbmdlDQoNCi3DqXJpYw0KDQrvu78tLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFs IE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogaWVzZyA8aWVzZy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnPiBvbiBiZWhh bGYgb2YgQWxpc3NhIENvb3BlciA8YWxpc3NhQGNvb3BlcncuaW4+DQpEYXRlOiBGcmlkYXksIDIw IE1hcmNoIDIwMjAgYXQgMTU6NTANClRvOiBBbHZhcm8gUmV0YW5hIDxhcmV0YW5hLmlldGZAZ21h aWwuY29tPg0KQ2M6ICJkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWdpdC11c2luZy1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5vcmciIDxkcmFm dC1pZXRmLWdpdC11c2luZy1naXRodWJAaWV0Zi5vcmc+LCAiaWV0Zi1hbmQtZ2l0aHViQGlldGYu b3JnIiA8aWV0Zi1hbmQtZ2l0aHViQGlldGYub3JnPiwgSUVTRyA8aWVzZ0BpZXRmLm9yZz4sICJn aXQtY2hhaXJzQGlldGYub3JnIiA8Z2l0LWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4sIENocmlzdG9waGVyIFdv b2QgPGNhd0BoZWFwaW5nYml0cy5uZXQ+DQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogQWx2YXJvIFJldGFuYSdzIERp c2N1c3Mgb24gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1naXQtdXNpbmctZ2l0aHViLTA1OiAod2l0aCBESVNDVVNTIGFu ZCBDT01NRU5UKQ0KDQogICAgRllJLCB0aGUgc3RhdHVzIG9mIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgd2FzIGNo YW5nZWQgdG8gaW5mb3JtYXRpb25hbC4NCiAgICANCiAgICBBbGlzc2ENCiAgICANCiAgICANCiAg ICA+IE9uIE1hciAxMSwgMjAyMCwgYXQgMjo1MyBQTSwgQWx2YXJvIFJldGFuYSB2aWEgRGF0YXRy YWNrZXIgPG5vcmVwbHlAaWV0Zi5vcmc+IHdyb3RlOg0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiBBbHZhcm8gUmV0 YW5hIGhhcyBlbnRlcmVkIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgYmFsbG90IHBvc2l0aW9uIGZvcg0KICAgID4g ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1naXQtdXNpbmctZ2l0aHViLTA1OiBEaXNjdXNzDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IFdo ZW4gcmVzcG9uZGluZywgcGxlYXNlIGtlZXAgdGhlIHN1YmplY3QgbGluZSBpbnRhY3QgYW5kIHJl cGx5IHRvIGFsbA0KICAgID4gZW1haWwgYWRkcmVzc2VzIGluY2x1ZGVkIGluIHRoZSBUbyBhbmQg Q0MgbGluZXMuIChGZWVsIGZyZWUgdG8gY3V0IHRoaXMNCiAgICA+IGludHJvZHVjdG9yeSBwYXJh Z3JhcGgsIGhvd2V2ZXIuKQ0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IFBsZWFzZSByZWZlciB0byBo dHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pZXNnL3N0YXRlbWVudC9kaXNjdXNzLWNyaXRlcmlhLmh0bWwN CiAgICA+IGZvciBtb3JlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGFib3V0IElFU0cgRElTQ1VTUyBhbmQgQ09NTUVO VCBwb3NpdGlvbnMuDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gVGhlIGRvY3VtZW50LCBhbG9uZyB3 aXRoIG90aGVyIGJhbGxvdCBwb3NpdGlvbnMsIGNhbiBiZSBmb3VuZCBoZXJlOg0KICAgID4gaHR0 cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1naXQtdXNpbmctZ2l0aHVi Lw0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KICAgID4gRElT Q1VTUzoNCiAgICA+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0NCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gVGhpcyBpcyBhIHByb2Nl c3MgRElTQ1VTUy4gIEkgZG9uJ3QgYmVsaWV2ZSB0aGUgc3RhdHVzIG9mIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQg YXMgYQ0KICAgID4gQkNQIGJlbG9uZ2luZyB0byBCQ1AgMjUgd2FzIGRpc2N1c3NlZCBpbiB0aGUg V0cgb3Igd2l0aCB0aGUgSUVURiBjb21tdW5pdHkuDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IFRoZSBDaGFydGVy IGZvciB0aGUgZ2l0IFdHIG9ubHkgZXhwbGljaXRseSBtZW50aW9ucyBCQ1AgOToNCiAgICA+IA0K ICAgID4gICBUaGUgZG9jdW1lbnRzIHByb2R1Y2VkIGJ5IHRoaXMgZ3JvdXAgd2lsbCBub3QgYWx0 ZXIgdGhlIEludGVybmV0IFN0YW5kYXJkcw0KICAgID4gICBQcm9jZXNzIChCQ1AgOSkuIFRoZXkg d2lsbCBkZXNjcmliZSBob3cgdG8gd29yayB3aXRoaW4gaXQuIFdoZXRoZXIgd29ya2luZw0KICAg ID4gICBncm91cHMgY2hvb3NlIHRvIHVzZSBHaXRIdWIgb3IgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50ZWQgcG9saWNp ZXMgdG8gc3VwcG9ydCB0aGVpciB3b3JrDQogICAgPiAgIHdpbGwgcmVtYWluIGVudGlyZWx5IGF0 IHRoZWlyIGRpc2NyZXRpb24uDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IEhvd2V2ZXIsIGluY2x1ZGluZyB0aGlz IGRvY3VtZW50IGFzIGEgcGFydCBvZiBCQ1AgMjUgKElFVEYgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cA0KICAgID4g R3VpZGVsaW5lcyBhbmQgUHJvY2VkdXJlcykgcmVzdWx0cyBpbiB0aGUgaW50ZXJwcmV0YXRpb24g dGhhdCBpdCByZXByZXNlbnRzDQogICAgPiBjb25zZW5zdXMgb24gaG93IFdHcyBzaG91bGQgcHJv Y2VlZCAtLSBhbmQgbm90IHRoYXQgdGhlIGRlY2lzaW9uICJ0byB1c2UgR2l0SHViDQogICAgPiBv ciB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnRlZCBwb2xpY2llcy4uLltpc10uLi5lbnRpcmVseSBhdCB0aGVpciBkaXNj cmV0aW9uLiINCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gTXkgcmVhZGluZyBvZiB0aGUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0IGlz IHRoYXQgdGhlIGN1cnJlbnQgUkZDIEVkaXRvciBub3RlIChpbiB3aGljaA0KICAgID4gYXBwZW5k aW5nIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCB0byBCQ1AgMjUgaXMgcmVxdWVzdGVkKSB3YXMgYWRkZWQgb25seSBh ZnRlciB0aGUgdG9waWMNCiAgICA+IHdhcyBicm91Z2h0IHVwIGluIHRoZSBHZW5hcnQgTEMgcmV2 aWV3LiAgW0RpZCBJIG1pc3MgdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24/XQ0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiBJT1csIGJv dGggKDEpIHRoZSBwcm9jZXNzIG9mIHJlYWNoaW5nIHRoZSBjb25jbHVzaW9uIHRoYXQgdGhpcyBk b2N1bWVudCBiZWxvbmdzDQogICAgPiBpbiBCQ1AgMjUsIGFuZCAoMikgdGhlIGNvbmNlcHQgdGhh dCB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IHdvdWxkIGJlIHBhcnQgb2YgQkNQIDI1LCBhcmUNCiAgICA+IHRoZSBz dWJqZWN0IG9mIG15IERJU0NVU1MuICAgIEkgd291bGQgbGlrZSBmb3IgdGhlIElFU0cgdG8gZGlz Y3VzcyB0aGlzIHRvcGljLg0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiBOb3QgZXhwZWN0aW5nIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1l bnQgdG8gYmUgcGFydCBvZiBCQ1AgMjUsIG9yIGhhdmluZyBhbiBleHBsaWNpdA0KICAgID4gZGlz Y3Vzc2lvbiB3aXRoIHRoZSBjb21tdW5pdHkgYWJvdXQgaXQsIHdvdWxkIGxlYWQgbWUgdG8gY2xl YXIgbXkgRElTQ1VTUy4NCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gPT09PQ0KICAgID4gW05vbiBibG9ja2luZyBj b21tZW50LiAgSSdtIGluY2x1ZGluZyBpdCBoZXJlIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaXMgcmVsYXRlZCB0byB0 aGUNCiAgICA+IHN0YXR1cyBvZiB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQuXQ0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiBUaGlzIGRv Y3VtZW50IHdvdWxkIGJlIHZlcnkgZ29vZCBJbmZvcm1hdGlvbmFsIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KICAgID4g DQogICAgPiBJIGFtIG5vdCBhIHJlZ3VsYXIgR2l0SHViIHVzZXIgKGFuZCBub25lIG9mIHRoZSBX R3MgSSdtIHJlc3BvbnNpYmxlIGZvciB1c2UgaXQNCiAgICA+IGFzIHBhcnQgb2YgdGhlaXIgcHJv Y2VzcyksIGJ1dCBJIGhhdmUgbm8gcmVhc29uIHRvIGRvdWJ0IHRoYXQgdGhlIHRleHQNCiAgICA+ IHJlcHJlc2VudHMgd2hhdCBpcyBiZWxpZXZlZCB0byBiZSB0aGUgYmVzdCB3YXkgdG8gdXNlIEdp dEh1YiB3aXRoaW4gdGhlIElFVEYNCiAgICA+IHByb2Nlc3MuICBIb3dldmVyLCB0aGUgZGVzaWdu YXRpb24gYXMgYSBCQ1AgY2FuIGNyZWF0ZSBjb25mdXNpb24uICBbQWdhaW4sIHRoaXMNCiAgICA+ IGlzIGEgbm9uLWJsb2NraW5nIGNvbW1lbnQuXQ0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IC0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0NCiAgICA+IENPTU1FTlQ6DQogICAgPiAtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQogICAgPiANCiAg ICA+IA0KICAgID4gKDApIEkgc2hhcmUgV2FycmVuJ3MgY29uY2VybnMuDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+ ICgxKSBUaGUgZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIgc2hvdWxkIGxpc3QgZHJhZnQtdGhvbXNvbi1naXQtdXNpbmct Z2l0aHViIGFzIGJlaW5nDQogICAgPiByZXBsYWNlZCBieSB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KICAgID4g DQogICAgPiAoMikgSXQgd291bGQgYmUgbmljZSB0byBoYXZlIGEgc2hvcnQgdGVybWlub2xvZ3kg c2VjdGlvbjsgSSBhc3N1bWUgbWFueSBwZW9wbGUNCiAgICA+IHJlYWRpbmcgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVu dCB3aWxsIG5vdCBhbHJlYWR5IGJlIEdpdEh1Yi1zYXZ5LCBzbyBwdXNoLCBwdWxsLCBjb21taXRz LA0KICAgID4gbWF5IG5vdCBiZSBmYW1pbGlhciB0byB0aGVtLiAgQWx0ZXJuYXRpdmVseSwgYW4g SW5mb3JtYXRpb25hbCBwb2ludGVyIHRvIGENCiAgICA+IHR1dG9yaWFsIHdvdWxkIGFsc28gYmUg b2suDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+ICgzKSBQZXJzb25hbGx5LCBJIGRvbid0IGhhdmUgYW4gaXNzdWUg d2l0aCB0aGUgdXNlIG9mIEdpdEh1YiwgYnV0IHNvbWUgb2YgdGhlDQogICAgPiBzdGF0ZW1lbnRz IGluIHRoZSBJbnRyb2R1Y3Rpb24gc291bmQgbGlrZSBtYXJrZXRpbmcgYmx1cmJzLCBmb3IgZXhh bXBsZToNCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gLSAiVXNlIG9mIHRoaXMgc2VydmljZSBoYXMgYmVlbiBmb3Vu ZCB0byByZWR1Y2UgdGhlIHRpbWUgdGhhdCBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3Vwcw0KICAgID4gICBuZWVkIHRv IHByb2R1Y2UgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGFuZCB0byBpbXByb3ZlIHRoZSBxdWFsaXR5IG9mIHRoZSBmaW5h bCByZXN1bHQuIg0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiAtICIuLi5lbmNvdXJhZ2UgY29udHJpYnV0aW9ucyBm cm9tIGEgbGFyZ2VyIHNldCBvZiBjb250cmlidXRvcnMuIg0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiAtICJVc2lu ZyBHaXRIdWIgY2FuIGFsc28gYnJvYWRlbiB0aGUgY29tbXVuaXR5IG9mIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9ycyBm b3IgYQ0KICAgID4gICBzcGVjaWZpY2F0aW9uLiINCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gKDQpIFtuaXRdIHMv VGhpcyBpcyBwcm9ibGVtYXRpYyBmb3IgY29udHJpYnV0b3JzIHdobyBkbyBub3QgdHJhY2sgZGlz Y3Vzc2lvbg0KICAgID4gY2xvc2VseS4vVGhpcyBpcyBwcm9ibGVtYXRpYyBmb3IgY29udHJpYnV0 b3JzIHdobyBkbyBub3QgdHJhY2sgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbnMNCiAgICA+IGNsb3NlbHkuDQogICAgPiAN CiAgICA+ICg1KSBbbWFqb3JdICDCpzUuMzogIldvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAgY2hhaXJzIFNIT1VMRCBj b25maXJtIHRoYXQgdGhlIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXANCiAgICA+IGhhcyBjb25zZW5zdXMgdG8gYWRv cHQgYW55IHByb2Nlc3MuIiAgV2hlbiB3b3VsZCB0aGUgY2hhaXJzIG5vdCBjb25maXJtDQogICAg PiBjb25zZW5zdXMgdG8gYWRvcHQgYSBwcm9jZXNzPyAgSU9XLCB3aHkgaXMgdGhpcyBub3QgYSBN VVNUPw0KICAgID4gDQogICAgPiBOb3RlIHRoYXQgwqczIHNheXMgdGhpczoNCiAgICA+IA0KICAg ID4gICBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIENoYWlycyBhcmUgcmVzcG9uc2libGUgZm9yIGRldGVybWluaW5n IGhvdyB0byBiZXN0DQogICAgPiAgIGFjY29tcGxpc2ggdGhlIGNoYXJ0ZXIgb2JqZWN0aXZlcyBp biBhbiBvcGVuIGFuZCB0cmFuc3BhcmVudCBmYXNoaW9uLg0KICAgID4gICBUaGUgV29ya2luZyBH cm91cCBDaGFpcnMgYXJlIHJlc3BvbnNpYmxlIGZvciBkZXRlcm1pbmluZyBpZiB0aGVyZSBpcw0K ICAgID4gICBpbnRlcmVzdCBpbiB1c2luZyBHaXRIdWIgYW5kIG1ha2luZyBhIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBj YWxsIHRvIGRldGVybWluZSBpZg0KICAgID4gICB0aGUgcHJvcG9zZWQgcG9saWN5IGFuZCB1c2Ug aXMgYWNjZXB0YWJsZS4NCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gRXZlbiB0aG91Z2ggdGhpcyB0ZXh0IGRvZXNu J3QgdXNlIHJmYzIxMTkga2V5d29yZHMsIG15IGltcHJlc3Npb24gb2YgdGhlIGludGVudA0KICAg ID4gaXMgdGhhdCBpdCBpcyByZXF1aXJlZCBmb3IgdGhlIGNoYWlycyB0byBtYWtlIHRoZSBjb25z ZW5zdXMgY2FsbC4gIElPVywgSSB0aGluaw0KICAgID4gdGhhdCB0aGlzIHRleHQgYW5kIHRoZSBv bmUgYWJvdmUgKGZyb20gwqc1LjMpIGFyZSBpbiBjb25mbGljdC4NCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gKDYp IMKnNS4zLjI6DQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+ICAgR2FpbmluZyBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIGNvbnNlbnN1 cyBhYm91dCB0aGUgcmVzb2x1dGlvbiBvZiBpc3N1ZXMgY2FuIGJlDQogICAgPiAgIGRvbmUgaW4g dGhlIGFic3RyYWN0LCB3aXRoIGVkaXRvcnMgYmVpbmcgcGVybWl0dGVkIHRvIGNhcHR1cmUgdGhl DQogICAgPiAgIG91dGNvbWUgb2YgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbnMgYXMgdGhleSBzZWUgZml0Lg0KICAgID4g DQogICAgPiBUaGlzIHNlbnRlbmNlIGRvZXNuJ3Qgc291bmQgcmlnaHQgdG8gbWU6ICJjb25zZW5z dXMuLi5jYW4gYmUgZG9uZSBpbiB0aGUNCiAgICA+IGFic3RyYWN0LCB3aXRoIGVkaXRvcnMgYmVp bmcgcGVybWl0dGVkIHRvIGNhcHR1cmUgdGhlIG91dGNvbWUuLi5hcyB0aGV5IHNlZQ0KICAgID4g Zml0Ii4gIFRoYXQgbGFzdCBwYXJ0IGRvZXNuJ3Qgc291bmQgcmlnaHQ6IENoYWlycyBjYWxsIGNv bnNlbnN1cy4gIE1heWJlIEknbQ0KICAgID4gbWlzaW50ZXJwcmV0aW5nLi4uDQogICAgPiANCiAg ICA+ICg3KSBbbWFqb3JdLiBXaHkgaXMgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1naXQtZ2l0aHViLXdnLWNvbmZpZ3Vy YXRpb24gbGlzdGVkIGFzIGENCiAgICA+IE5vcm1hdGl2ZSBSZWZlcmVuY2U/ICBJIGRvbid0IHRo aW5rIHRoYXQgZGVwZW5kZW5jeSBpcyBuZWVkZWQuDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gDQog ICAgDQogICAgDQoNCg== From nobody Fri Mar 20 08:56:59 2020 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 A4E4D3A0BF2; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 08:56:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 8_mynVdOeXVw; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 08:56:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (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 D43CD3A03F8; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 08:56:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p200300dee7239a007961e4d1ac1a08c3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e723:9a00:7961:e4d1:ac1a:8c3]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1jFK0A-00052X-RZ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 16:56:02 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) From: Mirja Kuehlewind In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 16:56:00 +0100 Cc: Paul Hoffman , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , IESG Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> <35046BE2-7120-492F-AE1C-DA74FA1AA2C8@icann.org> To: Barry Leiba X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1584719789;16b82477; X-HE-SMSGID: 1jFK0A-00052X-RZ Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?b?W0V4dF0gTWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZCdzIERp?= =?utf-8?q?scuss_on_draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_D?= =?utf-8?q?ISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 15:56:37 -0000 I thought Alissa said that they want to update but not before after the = IETF-107 week=E2=80=A6 > On 20. Mar 2020, at 15:56, Barry Leiba = wrote: >=20 > Where are we on this DISCUSS? >=20 > Barry >=20 > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 9:49 AM Mirja Kuehlewind = wrote: >>=20 >> Hi Paul, >>=20 >> See inline. >>=20 >>> On 11. Mar 2020, at 21:36, Paul Hoffman = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Catching up on the rest of Mirja's comments (not already discussed = on this thread) >>>=20 >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> COMMENT: >>>>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Other questions/comments: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 1) Sec 2.3: >>>>>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were = personnel changes." >>>>>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this = sentence really >>>>>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker = or GitHub) and >>>>>> what is should do? >>>=20 >>> We will change "API" to "ability in the Datatracker=E2=80=9D. >>=20 >> I=E2=80=99m still not sure what exactly is needed here? Can you maybe = explain what the idea is? >>=20 >>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 2) Sec 2.5: >>>>>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" >>>>>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be = maintained within >>>>>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical = or desirable: >>>>>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There >>>>>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. >>>=20 >>> Some chairs have indicated it is desirable, so the WG thought it = should be possible. >>=20 >> Yes, I think this is a discussion for the other git draft. >>=20 >>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 3) Also sec 2.5: >>>>>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be = a >>>>>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator = of an >>>>>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new >>>>>> repository within that organization for a single document." >>>>>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit = it to the >>>>>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft = does not seems >>>>>> too useful... >>>=20 >>> Document authors can tell the WG chairs that they intend to create a = new WG draft. If that happens, the WG chair creates the repo with either = the intended draft name or something semantically relevant, and tells = the document authors before they turn in the -00. (I think this has = already happened in some WGs=E2=80=A6) >>=20 >> That's fine. But the cited text talks about a datatracker interface = for that. Not sure if that is the right approach. >>=20 >>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 4) Sec 2.6: >>>>>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." >>>>>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you = can add link to >>>>>> external pages? >>>=20 >>> This is currently true for chairs for their WGs, but not for authors = in their document page. >>=20 >> It was not clear to me that this was intended on the document level. = I think that should be clarified. How would that look like? Authors can = add a GitHub repo name or just any URL? Not sure if authors should do = that or only chairs on a per-document basis; might be different for = individual drafts and wg documents. >>=20 >> Thanks! >> Mirja >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> --Paul Hoffman >>=20 >=20 >=20 From nobody Fri Mar 20 09:00:54 2020 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 3CA723A0BFF; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:00:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Warren Kumari via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, git-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, Christopher Wood , caw@heapingbits.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.121.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Warren Kumari Message-ID: <158472003813.13556.8322119950815283909@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:00:38 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 16:00:43 -0000 Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-git-using-github-06: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Balloting closed for this document a while back, and so this is purely a symbolic act, but with the change from BCP to Informational, I'm changing my position from Abstain to No Objection. I still don't love this document, but the authors and WG have carefully considered the questions raised, and made changes to address them. The status change addresses my largest source of discomfort and I'm signaling that with a (pointless) ballot position update... --- Previous (2020-03-11) position: I still don't love this, but I changed from DISCUSS to Abstain - https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/46 , https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-and-github/vnXiskU2VGIx8VenEP34GWGfOwM/ I recognize that my opinion does not trump WG / IETF consensus, so I'm holding my nose on this one. While I'm on this soapbox, I'd like to thank the authors for listening to, and trying to address my concerns. I'm uncomfortable with much of this document: 1: This a BCP, and strongly implies that this is the "right" way for working groups to manage themselves and documents streams. The charter says: "Whether working groups choose to use GitHub or the documented policies to support their work will remain entirely at their discretion." - while the document does let WGs choose, the BCP track strongly implies that this is the "best" way. I happen to put documents that I author in git (hosted on GitHub), and use that to collaborate with my co-authors, but this is *our* choice, imposing our working process on others is a mistake - we have used the "as long at it can be turned into the canonical format we don't care how you make it" paradigm for a reason. If people create the XML in vim or emacs is, and should be entirely their decision - telling people that the "right" editor is vi is wrong - and a BCP does that... The charter also says: "The documents produced by this group will not alter the Internet Standards Process (BCP 9). They will describe how to work within it." but the document sails very close to the wind in many places - e.g: "Working Group chairs MAY request a revision of an Internet-Draft being managed on Github at any time, in consultation with document editors." It has always been clear that chairs can request revisions to WG documents; this doesn't change it, but mentioning things like this simply muddies the water / makes more places for people to have to check. Section 7 is an example place where is is really dangerous - and I think comes close to trying to change BCP9. 2: The focus on GitHub makes my deeply uncomfortable -- I get the argument that it is the standard / best known hosted git provider (and, in my *opinion* the right one for us to use), but there are many places where term "GitHub" applies to "self hosted" solutions like GitLab / Gitea / etc. This feels very close to the IETF recommending that WG participants sign the blue-sheets with a Bic pen when all we need is some sort of writing implement. Just as one example: "GitHub facilitates more involved interactions,..." this is true of gitea, gitlab, bitbucket and many other tools -- calling out GitHub gives one tool prominence and is not appropriate for the IETF to do. 3: We require that all decisions be made on mailing lists - when people happen to use GitHub to collaborate on documents and happen to use the issue tracker to track issues, it is clear that this is just for their personal convenience -- having WG "owned" repos *will* lead to instances where decisions get made in the issue tracker, and not communicated tp the mailing list - this will end up with two classes of users: those that keep checking the issue tracker, and those that follow the mailing list and are surprised by the decisions made. 4: git (and GitHub) has a really steep learning curve - if a WG decides to fully jump in and start using GitHub, this (either explicitly or implicitly) disenfranchises people who don't use or want to use git. 5: Moving state (primarily issues) from a personal repo to a WG one when a document is adopted is non-trivial -- "You can only transfer issues between repositories owned by the same user or organization account. You can't transfer an issue from a private repository to a public repository." and they have to be (AFAIK), moved individually - this will likely lead to loss of state (I may also have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the document that talks about migrating a document / repo from an individual to a WG hosted version, and what should happen). I have a document which moved from hosted at www.github.com/wkumari/ to www.github.com/capport-wg/ - this involved administrative annoyance, loss of state, and annoyance - for no benefit that I could see. I think a much much better approach would be have people simple keep the documents in their personal repos and not have the disruption that moving the repo entails. Don't get me wrong - I like git, and a: host my own gitea instance, b: maintain a few gitlabs and gogs instances, and c: put all of my drafts in GitHub - but I really don't think that the IETF should be implying that this is the "one true way" (BCP) (nor do I like the WG hosted model). From nobody Fri Mar 20 09:04:40 2020 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 E8A363A0BE7 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:04:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LEKIZe22Hbq0 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22e.google.com (mail-lj1-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 8F4093A0BD7 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:04:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22e.google.com with SMTP id o10so6968182ljc.8 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:04:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tJ4JKa5VJ4/lTGTfKWPQqZUgzp1eI4Qky6kNhLFjWys=; b=Bnyy6hfhQZiuwulQRfOhgSNm9aifKVxMkGPW6FOr4BwZO0Uxhl7x0McC6YyU2nd9vG SYmO/KImf7aNAL6IWkvMir21cgd4c9lJyNU1TS0g1OrGW/8puu8rVyACQW7YXTNdHuFV T25V4NC7/vBwUIhNlY5OFY2poSgyQqrjhXYpvKe7VWNMi8shM+/GHf0O3DrPTFvCsDjj Sdd+gIAHUggi1ojsBcjqoD875+n5GYa79aP0pCl1bSmPqg+h4xeTF/f4EXUihmS13ve7 2Tp/oOuZ7jozg6Z6VrFXil+dlIZHCauCEJlwdgK7ErKE4p9a19TkkKxInIyXAGGQwvYy VPAQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tJ4JKa5VJ4/lTGTfKWPQqZUgzp1eI4Qky6kNhLFjWys=; b=NhTbIhfOZcI0bu/LL4SPHfz/53vNnoL4DPHQ50Sfrm9Ms8hj3VXUP1mXN2v7re5R85 J5Mz3mMgYYeDcEQo88N58M7sbYQEqLCZ+1u9TDtdp8YwgsDJq3nErTRvHTRqyCIgWH1P O/E0wuTjys/DWSw4t8kiEjaL9QVGUN1d6Dyqy7EDdYHsSM7h7nseVGYmhck0y5cMGO98 9/u8MtGLxDv02QAw4RKgO9ttjPiGFd2fbYCsaMWdlvPw0+NbNCKmc85X9B79LpevOix4 7zxuTMfuMO+XKctK4HWcnlkLYwQFZLzUIRoIHYJ7tx4AL1KoQxSraBXQS9wELiOKTckV Ey7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1PawEaVaxgXocVKz+teVdghwlb5FXBSxNLsBmSfKOymkB21pGE RJ+OI+4s2JqDcXm9H/qj4i4eWBGuUGnTRj7HciXY+Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvZI5ZEMKGikCvtZw1TEdqyeoF48ijpeLuY5NMC/PGLe1hAb1anOt7nY2/ZkAyl9gUNYdFjIm7lakfhB3PqvXU= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a0cd:: with SMTP id f13mr5745470ljm.198.1584720264044; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:04:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5645321C-A644-4A93-B43F-D23F680DDD7A@mnot.net> <41b038cb-ca1f-43d7-975a-6efc72bb6e64@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <41b038cb-ca1f-43d7-975a-6efc72bb6e64@www.fastmail.com> From: Warren Kumari Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:03:47 -0400 Message-ID: To: Christopher Wood Cc: Mark Nottingham , Brian E Carpenter , "draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org," Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Propose changing draft-ietf-git-using-github from BCP to Informational X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 16:04:38 -0000 On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 10:38 AM Christopher Wood wro= te: > > Hearing little pushback, we're moving forward with this document as infor= mational. We can always re-publish this as a BCP later on should that be de= emed necessary. > I'd like to thank the authors and WG for listening and responding to comments / concerns. I've just taken the (bizarre) action of updating my ballot after the telechat has closed, to change from Abstain to No Objection. This doesn't change anything (Abstain is non-blocking), but I wanted to signal that my major source of concern has been addressed, and that, in my opinion, the process worked. So, a purely symbolic action, but I felt it was worth doing. Thank you all, W > Thanks, > Chris > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 2:09 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On 14 Mar 2020, at 6:20 am, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > > > > > =EF=BB=BFHi, > > > > > > I disagree that it is a minor or inconsequential change. It means tha= t it is no longer a set of rules that a WG must follow if they choose to us= e GitHub. It just becomes some non-binding suggestions. > > > > That is what this group is chartered to produce. > > > > > > > > This has conseqences for the text, starting with the Abstract: > > > > > >> This document describes best practices ... > > > > > > needs to be something like > > > > > > This document describes suggested guidelines ... > > > > > > Then delete section 1.5 and lower-case all the RFC2119 keywords, to a= void confusion. > > > > That=E2=80=99s already started; see the editors=E2=80=99 copy. > > > > > More seriously, we would lose the normative value of this: > > > > > >> In addition to Working Group policies, notices on repositories MUS= T > > >> include citations for the IETF Note Well (https://www.ietf.org/abo= ut/ > > >> note-well/). > > > > > > which really should be mandatory. Also this: > > > > > >> All repositories for Working Group documents within the Working Gr= oup > > >> organization MUST be public. > > > > > > I haven't re-read the whole draft. There may be other things as well = that are also important and not necessarily implied by RFC2418 already. So = I do not agree to the change of proposed status. > > > > > > Regards > > > Brian Carpenter > > > > > >> On 14-Mar-20 02:48, Christopher Wood wrote: > > >> During last call, some folks suggested draft-ietf-git-using-github i= s better suited as an Informational rather than BCP document. This seems li= ke a minor and inconsequential change, though I'd like to hear from the WG = to understand if folks object. To that end, if you disagree with this chang= e, can you please let us know why? > > >> > > >> Thanks! > > >> Chris > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Ietf-and-github mailing list > > >> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Ietf-and-github mailing list > > > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-and-github mailing list > Ietf-and-github@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github --=20 I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Fri Mar 20 09:21:19 2020 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 57B7A3A0C1D; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:21:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.648 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TrE7zhPFmLg1; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:21:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-il1-f181.google.com (mail-il1-f181.google.com [209.85.166.181]) (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 5804F3A0BF5; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-f181.google.com with SMTP id e8so6059888ilc.13; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:20:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HpqjLLP1hwCoBXwShDQ2sZYpYMnrEDWr63E7XAhjqAg=; b=RxTIofFoMZrfSEHEVovkCAa8BgNxIvCyx1jBx3LwaIMtvkqEyz8O2VJJcb3oCWrPDv wNWZ1zgIeeCGj8zpvQ260F92+EaBFF+cUzLCHv3B9gvJeh/ogkvXTXvzIlgGcYYwY6Qo XjNFSJ5bZS59Jek85XfDVX0jfHqyeZGsVhak94hrgmcvU/rX5NH/mdKde2QF3gbMf3T8 IjZNp0WBzqNmksR7yJh/Y/pHPywDKdYMeqZXobp9dC+OGeSYbIwmgrYE7NYZMuBCahVU IW1AFWd9SV8yaxiaQ59e3vX0WVKNy44i8MFS9DShkmV7w7NZudxne/XoUBN8wKeXY+c+ slMw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ28YUTcDUqxqYG2s4HWFHfRPlE9/BCppWa9C3iNbh6cJ5g3rHxs A3qBJgPjyA/WeXyxjr80T4puaZcaS0b+5EIdDaM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvGesvKCEdOad0SQxTV20wsEn4PUvcKB6DD5+tqkiR57wHrJUwOyZJD4mzq/QS+3hJxXArHdQ8KEJQQsEPNvoA= X-Received: by 2002:a92:9107:: with SMTP id t7mr9074887ild.140.1584721256105; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:20:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <158383623742.15390.14960725517486025456@ietfa.amsl.com> <35046BE2-7120-492F-AE1C-DA74FA1AA2C8@icann.org> In-Reply-To: From: Barry Leiba Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:20:42 -0400 Message-ID: To: Mirja Kuehlewind Cc: Paul Hoffman , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" , IESG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] =?utf-8?b?W0V4dF0gTWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZCdzIERp?= =?utf-8?q?scuss_on_draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-06=3A_=28with_D?= =?utf-8?q?ISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 16:21:09 -0000 Ack; thanks. b On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:56 AM Mirja Kuehlewind wro= te: > > I thought Alissa said that they want to update but not before after the I= ETF-107 week=E2=80=A6 > > > > > On 20. Mar 2020, at 15:56, Barry Leiba wrote: > > > > Where are we on this DISCUSS? > > > > Barry > > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 9:49 AM Mirja Kuehlewind = wrote: > >> > >> Hi Paul, > >> > >> See inline. > >> > >>> On 11. Mar 2020, at 21:36, Paul Hoffman wrot= e: > >>> > >>> Catching up on the rest of Mirja's comments (not already discussed on= this thread) > >>> > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ---- > >>>>>> COMMENT: > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------= ---- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Other questions/comments: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 1) Sec 2.3: > >>>>>> "There should likely be an API to specify that there were personne= l changes." > >>>>>> Inline with the comment in the shepherd write-up, I find this sent= ence really > >>>>>> unclear. I'm not even sure where the API should be (datatracker or= GitHub) and > >>>>>> what is should do? > >>> > >>> We will change "API" to "ability in the Datatracker=E2=80=9D. > >> > >> I=E2=80=99m still not sure what exactly is needed here? Can you maybe = explain what the idea is? > >> > >>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2) Sec 2.5: > >>>>>> "Creating a new repository for an individual draft" > >>>>>> This section indicated that also individual drafts could be mainta= ined within > >>>>>> the official wg organization. I'm not sure if that is practical or= desirable: > >>>>>> Which individual docs should the chairs allow repos for and which = not? There > >>>>>> can be quite a lot of draft in some groups. > >>> > >>> Some chairs have indicated it is desirable, so the WG thought it shou= ld be possible. > >> > >> Yes, I think this is a discussion for the other git draft. > >> > >>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 3) Also sec 2.5: > >>>>>> " As an incremental step, this document proposes that there be a > >>>>>> facility in the Datatracker interface to allow an administrator of= an > >>>>>> ietf-wg- organization to request the creation of a new > >>>>>> repository within that organization for a single document." > >>>>>> For -00 version you usually want to have a repo before you submit = it to the > >>>>>> datatracker. So a button on the datatracker page of the draft does= not seems > >>>>>> too useful... > >>> > >>> Document authors can tell the WG chairs that they intend to create a = new WG draft. If that happens, the WG chair creates the repo with either th= e intended draft name or something semantically relevant, and tells the doc= ument authors before they turn in the -00. (I think this has already happen= ed in some WGs=E2=80=A6) > >> > >> That's fine. But the cited text talks about a datatracker interface fo= r that. Not sure if that is the right approach. > >> > >>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 4) Sec 2.6: > >>>>>> "At the time of this writing this feature was under development." > >>>>>> Wasn't there always/for a long time already a feature where you ca= n add link to > >>>>>> external pages? > >>> > >>> This is currently true for chairs for their WGs, but not for authors = in their document page. > >> > >> It was not clear to me that this was intended on the document level. I= think that should be clarified. How would that look like? Authors can add = a GitHub repo name or just any URL? Not sure if authors should do that or o= nly chairs on a per-document basis; might be different for individual draft= s and wg documents. > >> > >> Thanks! > >> Mirja > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >>> --Paul Hoffman > >> > > > > > From nobody Fri Mar 20 11:27:11 2020 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 28B793A0DBD; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 11:26:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.121.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: git-chairs@ietf.org, caw@heapingbits.net, Christopher Wood , draft-ietf-git-using-github@ietf.org, The IESG , rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, ietf-and-github@ietf.org, alissa@cooperw.in MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <158472880914.13452.13796069680800503788@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 11:26:49 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Ietf-and-github] Document Action: 'Working Group GitHub Usage Guidance' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-git-using-github-06.txt) X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 20 Mar 2020 18:27:01 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Working Group GitHub Usage Guidance' (draft-ietf-git-using-github-06.txt) as Informational RFC This document is the product of the GitHub Integration and Tooling Working Group. The IESG contact person is Alissa Cooper. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/ Technical Summary: This document describes best practices for Working Groups that use GitHub for their work including, for example: guidelines for deciding when and how to use GitHub in working groups, methods for contributing to IETF documents using GitHub, and working group policies for managing document development on GitHub. Working Group Summary: This document collates experience from multiple IETF members with varying levels of experience and expertise with GitHub. As such, it encapsulates knowledge relevant to a wide audience in the IETF. No content has been flagged as particularly controversial (yet). Document Quality: The document is well written and easy to read. Personnel: Christopher A. Wood is the Document Shepherd. Alissa Cooper is the Responsible Area Director. From nobody Fri Mar 20 23:13:16 2020 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 CA3DC3A11EA; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 23:13:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=lowentropy.net header.b=YTlzYRiL; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=pE3Up2eT 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 g63prW4vSs3N; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 23:13:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1ECC3A11E8; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 23:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 373545C00F7; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 02:13:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 21 Mar 2020 02:13:11 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=ANKoZ1ArjyD4CadC8el/WhSJb0mY Lpb97+b1WobV9SI=; b=YTlzYRiLb8X+7hVBvfjQaFlUoETzG1H5v+brzyZuIc8I m+F+Yn9f+F6FvjWpDqbmoTju/qP5gs8QtQ3lJUiwOO7MYoP+ViN1ZdEaPPj4toGL ZdFi+QCUqKhz4qYDRv7vkiyjpBKIorOnW3jeppMw1oaOYLEm5Ko1iMj/bozkUpBl UBMpvWM2m4QW3dpDgyjCeUNpP7jmgLHtXJQmztcEVind7GTq5ywv7d2UCvgdogYI oWAze1D3uoXPqPYm+CErf0M8fYaYitQLmGb+M1ldTFul0eib7UnggkC19/1uTz9Y JUuKAroh9LZ7lrcURV2EZODGtKGmuWhuKqZA9UKemw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=ANKoZ1 ArjyD4CadC8el/WhSJb0mYLpb97+b1WobV9SI=; b=pE3Up2eTYD5PmKYFar7H7a Eh8AnmVTQuUr2EdX/7bA113sjVFgyDujuQZtzt4cKFUQ9IFPqKM16c4p9YZ7MRaW 2wxVRCu+1fs5fQYuSRr8JuVemxX4HezAz8bAdSNfv+mZRocZak2FkAqYdPD3giiy FkA4bb4l5uzNI/krA3/0x+8EbfA9TEAK6cIVsaTqrAoF1WlhFlS4wmGoE3Rya8He mRsfUZe4oXnSmIdGTD4kXSromV7oHo8QCoArcDhV/rH363UA3YB+sOMrx+sEUjpS ncnGIMsw4LUwfmGvlkODWhrlg/1HcqtT3YN2RUar7iWKMaC9qC+L4B/jqamBTNbw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudegvddgledtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 700F8E00B2; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 02:13:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-1021-g152deaf-fmstable-20200319v1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <6c820473-d7ab-47c5-885b-56ea519ebefc@www.fastmail.com> Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 17:12:39 +1100 From: "Martin Thomson" To: "Carsten Bormann" , "Salz, Rich" Cc: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, wgchairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Tools for GitHub backups X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 06:13:15 -0000 On Sat, Mar 21, 2020, at 01:27, Salz, Rich wrote: > > The toolchain I maintain (https://github.com/martinthomson/i-d-template) now has a better backup for issues and pull requests. > > I haven't looked, sorry. Does it also do labels? Yes, it does labels, including their colour and description. On Sat, Mar 21, 2020, at 01:38, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > snapshot of the issues > > Including the discussion? Yes, the entire discussion, including review comments, is saved for each issue. I haven't worked out how to render the comments that are attached to code just yet, and I'm not sure if the right data is being saved (position vs. originalPosition is still a bit mysterious), but it is all there. From nobody Sat Mar 21 06:48:33 2020 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 70BE03A13D4; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 06:48:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=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 gq__sk_Ypn61; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 06:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 1A0F43A13CF; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 06:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050102.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02LDklAa000417; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 13:48:29 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=fuoNfDjeuyxktk6Wbkw9LeNItNxI+tWcIgClxGwNAv8=; b=FFjQoWlO/AE2R0ZuF4XeeaTv97+KOr/nhTbBfPaHRBG/paxB+wfBteU/U5MyJt+iV2qA o8a6r5YF8qK7a+v9lvSS+lTyuawz/fK0+BjH0GLjCy+KB1dX5ZpcqLmEXsfcpr94MeLW VgAcHyOC3sslkGkqH51RayJdK1d+tJfmy7AC1kd98iRfCoKRSNQZy56J/CtH/EWsBa2P tR6C1c1vYUAvEeQ7PVi7ty7HWnfAtB23wu1g2klk+QjECQw8jb5f1L6O6rh6c5bOG4Ny xCsK4veorK+yAI6n6cmTJx0ln87KPWsqfaEuoiqblzfN+MQFT8k/D0vSmsBMI2RoR+2U 1g== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [184.51.33.19] (may be forged)) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2yw8vhhyqt-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 21 Mar 2020 13:48:29 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02LDlL7d026103; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 09:48:28 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.31]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ywe8u8jhf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 21 Mar 2020 09:48:28 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 09:48:27 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Sat, 21 Mar 2020 09:48:27 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Martin Thomson CC: "wgchairs@ietf.org" , "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Ietf-and-github] Tools for GitHub backups Thread-Index: AQHV/nNDEcNuTK7KeEmmieiunIfXXqhR0I+AgAEFCoCAADxKAA== Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 13:48:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <6c820473-d7ab-47c5-885b-56ea519ebefc@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.118.63] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <0F290F20840DB74680952E10CF1AC272@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-21_05:2020-03-20, 2020-03-21 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=605 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003210082 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-21_05:2020-03-20, 2020-03-21 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=582 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003210082 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Tools for GitHub backups X-BeenThere: ietf-and-github@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 13:48:32 -0000 PiBJdCBzYXZlcyB0aGlzIC4uLiBpdCBzYXZlcyB0aGF0IC4uLg0KDQpTbyBpbiBvcmRlciB0byBk byBhIGJhY2t1cCBpZiB0aGUgV0cgdXNlcyB5b3VyIENJIHRvb2xpbmcgdG8gc2F2ZSBkYXRhIGlu IHRoZSByZXBvLCB0aGVuIGFueW9uZSBjYW4gY2xvbmUgdGhlIHJlcG8gYW5kIGl0J3MgYWxsIHNl dC4gIElmIHRoZXkgZG9uJ3QgdXNlIHRoaXMsIHRoZW4gdGhlIHNlY3JldGFyaWF0IHdpbGwgbmVl ZCB0byBiZSBhbiBvd25lciB0byB1c2Ugb3RoZXIgdG9vbGluZyB0byBkbyBhIGJhY2t1cC4NCiAN Cg0K