Subject: [openpgp] Using Git for RFC 4880bis

From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 11:41:19 -0400

Hi OpenPGP folks--

As i understand it, Werner is currently working on his draft of 4880bis
using a pandoc2rfc toolchain.  If we choose to adopt this draft (see my
previous e-mail to the list), the underlying source of the document will
actually be markdown.

The work is being kept under revision control using git.

We appreciate (and encourage!) any changes people want to suggest the
usual way: via an e-mail to this mailing list explaining what text you
think needs to be changed and why.

However, some people may find it more convenient to propose specific
machine-readable changes that can be applied directly to the source; if
you want to do that, making them in the form of patches against the
markdown is probably best.

A public-facing copy of the git repo is hosted at gitlab for anyone who
wants to make edits against the source:

  https://gitlab.com/openpgp-wg/rfc4880bis

If you want to submit patches to the markdown in the draft's working
copy, you can send them directly to this mailing list.  I'm happy to
help folks sort out using "git send-email" if they want guidance on
making this toolchain work.  In my own local copy, i've done:

    git config sendemail.to 'IETF OpenPGP WG <[email-masked]>'

I find the documentation presented by "git help send-email" to be useful
if you're unfamiliar with this workflow.  Also, feel free to ask me for
help if you have any questions with the tooling.

While it's ok to submit pull requests or open issues (as placeholders
for things that need to be addressed) via the gitlab repository, all
IETF discussion should end up taking place on this mailing list.  See
CONTRIBUTING.md in the git repo if you're considering gitlab as a place
to report issues.

Whenever substantial changes to the document have been made and
stabilized by WG consensus, we'll tag the git repo and submit another
revision of the draft to the IETF datatracker so that changes and
progress are visible to everyone, including the folks who are not using
git.

Please speak up if you have any concerns or questions about this
mechanism.

        --dkg

---

From: Tom Ritter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:36:03 -0500

Can we use the Issues tracker (either in Gitlab or the IETF tools, but
not both) to note what changes are outstanding (but encourage people
to send the text proposals to the list)?  It would be helpful to have
some sort of list of outstanding changes we have rough consensus to
make but lack text proposals.  For example, using a real authenticated
mode instead of the MDC is a definite. I'm not sure if a
streaming-friendly mode there is consensus for, but it could be noted
as 'under discussion' or something.

-tom

---

From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:53:07 -0400

Hi Tom--

On Sun 2016-06-26 22:36:03 -0400, Tom Ritter wrote:
> to send the text proposals to the list)?

Yes.  I think we should use the gitlab issues tracker, not the IETF
tools, for the sake of simplicity.  I'll see what i can do about
adjusting the IETF tools issue tracker to indicate that the gitlab
issues tracker is the place to use.

As you say, actual discussion should take place on this list.

> It would be helpful to have some sort of list of outstanding changes
> we have rough consensus to make but lack text proposals.  For example,
> using a real authenticated mode instead of the MDC is a definite.  I'm
> not sure if a streaming-friendly mode there is consensus for, but it
> could be noted as 'under discussion' or something.

agreed.  If folks want to document specific outstanding changes please
feel free to open them as gitlab issues.  If the chairs judge there is
no consensus for a specific outstanding change after discussion, we
might go ahead and close the corresponding issue.

      --dkg