Re: [Ietf-and-github] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-git-using-github-04

["Martin Thomson" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for the review Qin,

I struggled a little with your second suggestion.  I ultimately settled on

+Retaining mailing lists as the primary venue for discussion of substantive
+matters ensures that this mode - along with the document management mode - is
+most compatible with existing work practices for Working Groups.

I chose 'future' rather than 'v2'.

On Sun, Feb 23, 2020, at 18:21, Qin Wu via Datatracker wrote:
> Reviewer: Qin Wu
> Review result: Has Nits
> 
> I have reviewed this document as part of the Ops area directorate's ongoing
> effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
> comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Ops area directors.
> Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other
> last call comments.
> 
> Good work, this draft provides working group github usage guidance and document
> best practice that can be referenced by all IETF working groups. A few nits
> that need to be fixed before moving forward: 1. Section 5.2,3rd paragraph: The
> word "err" is a little bit weird to me. s/err more toward/lean more toward 2.
> Section 5.2 5th paragraph: "As mailing lists remain the primary venue for
> discussion of
>    substantive matters, this mode and the document management only modes
>    remain those most compatible with existing work practices for Working
>    Groups."
> I feel the second half sentence is disconnected and not clear. should this be
> changed into "...only modes which remain those most" …? 3.Section 5.4.2,last
> paragraph The label “v2” has some ambiguity, since each draft may have already
> made multiple revisions. The latest version may not start with v1. In addition,
> should the decision label or component label be registered in IANA?
> 
> 
> 
>