Re: [Ietf-and-github] WGLC for draft-ietf-git-using-github

"Martin Thomson" <mt@lowentropy.net> Wed, 04 December 2019 05:02 UTC

Return-Path: <mt@lowentropy.net>
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 B49AF1200C7 for <ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 21:02:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, PDS_BTC_ID=0.499, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=PNu9X/ao; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=FMbbhGma
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_iF6P-6iOoD for <ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 21:02:22 -0800 (PST)
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 9D52412008F for <ietf-and-github@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 21:02:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C445B226EA for <ietf-and-github@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 00:02:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 04 Dec 2019 00:02:21 -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 :subject:content-type; s=fm3; bh=6YFi+Gq/gHnI/v8DFcJQegxtdQaDzEC /oeZmahCGcW8=; b=PNu9X/aocH7NBsdxDbTvXPbEw0A1H9JjWXp38VP3h200XWH rlIEt2FHB/MFyt7L38Oqf4E+1MZa4tyxPnsmHonHM314UocjEU5pDolp+q1+Lznl IWS7rdNiTUHTcgaho7V0Psfkq18EP6nuqLXdLh9tLLdpo+iD42uUbzlvXpT9X4CJ K/S2z9wvBjGsUK7yrv3TXw+qL2EqZyuWhw44juThdcktKVKBxYtc3dVfsb97O2GH IO3S4LAEqq35ZusH9M8+qGHmarQIPgtJDx8tgG93V3KLt6G5b516ecVyFrHpYcJ3 VNuuB0o9sxMpR7TsAZTruh6V8XSPcSB7NzJU0tw==
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=fm1; bh=6YFi+G q/gHnI/v8DFcJQegxtdQaDzEC/oeZmahCGcW8=; b=FMbbhGmapinziBftNJqRR1 iJnNLBkDtETeuWBeHO6DPEac6/w36PfGNS9pH3bZjXjV9R7ho9ycDcIxecT87k0n C+5ykqSj+9r+QBtaCsV35IzacAPjR8mkOXE5VOhw6nmVAjhfyAQi8axA8t/XsqoU g9oU3dOcWqHqtprf7HJT1uYBM6HYv3MWmDwKidAgRrjYxUQEFvlSp7TSG5mRB/O3 3m6jgfd6E1smDMr1zHOtEkYa6/HqBPmKiNNNBVzOOTABtgMD98zwU2My1WX1nW2q kbOb5R7ZLglsraXTZmXbs7HeL31mYSffLtyldoEKzWXf1gpoI32hvzU/cTEsNSog ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:3T3nXauZrX2hIqodT-NhnA8TcKyL_f6F3FIvo79mx5nhHjGgP7Xp0g>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrudejkedgjeekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttd ertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgrrhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhho figvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecurf grrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtnecuvehl uhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:3T3nXVevMUfalDXkjkRXS8EbQGcavInBh3S8RuT54Yk7MijHxH7F_A> <xmx:3T3nXTbILD6nrX81DCtAC2wvxj1FRaRAI7x4iNh1-Jn12zLIDh6YWA> <xmx:3T3nXQUMlEIBf4LzDjGf5wjKVG3qLnvTj0dzojSprtnyrYo2GvflwQ> <xmx:3T3nXabX2VRCb9zf1FqAX2_9sP1H0dKBRBv1tuXPvii8Iud9JV2BSg>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 87E51E00A3; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 00:02:21 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-612-g13027cc-fmstable-20191203v1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <4e138151-61fd-40fd-b768-d2f1ad01e9e5@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <E192F154-C83A-46FE-AE4D-149F02C7D287@akamai.com>
References: <d61508a2-74c0-448b-94a0-52d8b0f64285@www.fastmail.com> <E192F154-C83A-46FE-AE4D-149F02C7D287@akamai.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 16:02:01 +1100
From: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-and-github/QTrPeTZ1PWfB-ZNzQUqx__3rLP8>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] WGLC for draft-ietf-git-using-github
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" <ietf-and-github.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-and-github>, <mailto:ietf-and-github-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-and-github/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-and-github@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-and-github-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github>, <mailto:ietf-and-github-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 05:02:25 -0000

Thanks for the review Rich,

Your PR is https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/34  I created https://github.com/ietf-gitwg/using-github/pull/33 to cover a separate item before I saw your email.

On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, at 05:56, Salz, Rich wrote:
> Sec 3.1, Last sentence, about link from README to CONTRIBUTING. Should 
> that be a SHOULD and written in active-voice?
> At the end of 3.1, can you give an "anti-pattern" (we used to say 
> counter-example I guess) of what would be something unfustifiably 
> constraining?

This was written in reaction to some recent attempts to constrain policies.  I've removed the more strongly worded bit.  The problem here is that there is a balance between giving editors some leeway and ensuring that the output of the process properly reflects consensus.  For instance, in QUIC, substantive changes now require chair involvement.  That is a real burden if you are at a stage in the process where there are many changes to make.   When that process was introduced, there were several occasions when chairs were not especially responsive for different reasons (illness, leave, other responsibilities) and that did result in problems.

For now, I think that it's enough to suggest that chairs and editors communicate about processes to ensure that they are working.

> Sec 4.1.2 if restrictions on closing are changed, is this a change in 
> policy that must be communicated and the WG agree to? Or is this 
> something to include in the initial policy and if so, is there guidance 
> in this document for that?

I think that falls under the "communicating policies" text.
 
> Sec 4.3 "requires *email* server infrastructure" ?

Not just email, if I understand how it works.

> Sec 6, makes the document available "to a wider *IETF* audience" ?

Yes, but also not IETF.

> Sec 8, Add "These services are generally available at no cost" ?

That doesn't seem relevant here.

> 
> Sec 9 uses "you" language. Should that change to "Editor" language? 
> "Create a new issue for them"  And add a comment pointing to the issue 
> and directing discussion there?

I took the opportunity to revise this text.

> Sec A2 top of p	25  No "seem to lose" about it.  The lose sender info, 
> which makes it useless.

Not entirely true.  It retains some of that information, but I agree, it's not ideal.

> Appendix B needs to add authors for A3 and A4

I'm going to ask about these sections separately.  I think that they might be able to go.