Re: [Ietf-and-github] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT)

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

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