IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ietf-and-github] New draft, and proposal for BoF at IETF 103

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Wed, 19 September 2018 13:01 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 4A333130DEB for <ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 06:01:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 rbvFNVBFhb8e for <ietf-and-github@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 06:01:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi (emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi [62.142.5.110]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48FFC130DCC for <ietf-and-github@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 06:01:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eggert.org (unknown [62.248.255.56]) by emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id E28723021E; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 16:01:21 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from slate.wlan.netapp.com (nat-216-240-30-23.netapp.com [216.240.30.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DCF5561B7D6; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 16:00:54 +0300 (EEST)
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <1B6523C5-5A56-4592-9545-F847C4C5F509@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DBF04811-18A1-4EDE-8F8F-A7A5F83AD6E0"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 09:00:51 -0400
In-Reply-To: <15767A94-7E61-4A91-8DB3-719BB55C0ABC@cooperw.in>
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>, "ietf-and-github@ietf.org" <ietf-and-github@ietf.org>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
References: <5FED3790-8276-431F-85F1-6E42C57BA2F0@icann.org> <15767A94-7E61-4A91-8DB3-719BB55C0ABC@cooperw.in>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-MailScanner-ID: DCF5561B7D6.A5BFF
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-and-github/VmZ_g908TNa5ZtdxvnxaMhuZjzI>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] New draft, and proposal for BoF at IETF 103
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, 19 Sep 2018 13:01:26 -0000

Hi,

On 2018-9-19, at 8:43, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:
>> On Sep 14, 2018, at 8:08 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> wrote:
>> Greetings again. Alissa and I have started a new draft:
>>  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cooper-wugh-github-wg-configuration/
> 
> There have been no comments on this. Does that mean the proposals in the doc are uncontroversial, and we should skip the BOF and just proceed to working with the tools team and secretariat? Or does it mean people are busy, or not paying attention? It would be helpful to get a few answers to those questions to help figure out whether we need BOF time for this or not.

no offense, but there isn't really anything non-obvious in draft-cooper-wugh-github-wg-configuration. IMO draft-thomson-github-bcp-00 is quite a bit more practically useful. Is that also in scope for discussion?

As for the BOF, I'm not personally missing much integration on the IETF side. I would like more integration on the GitHub side, but that we can't directly influence. But if others have ideas for what might be useful to do on our side, sure.

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email