[Ietf-and-github] Éric Vyncke's Abstain on draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: (with COMMENT)

[Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-git-using-github-05: Abstain

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-git-using-github/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I abstain with the meaning of "I oppose this document but understand that
others differ and am not going to stand in the way of the others." per
https://www.ietf.org/standards/process/iesg-ballots/ as the main issue (see
below) cannot easily be fixed. I have also a couple of COMMENTs and I would
appreciate an answer to those COMMENTs even if you can freely ignore my main
ABSTAIN issue

Is there a reason why "GitHub" is used rather than simply "Git" or similar
system ? At least, it is explicit to be the commercial web site "github.com".
Alternatives such as GitLab and BitBucket are only briefly mentioned.

Section 1.3 has an amazing-to-my-eyes sentences "This document concentrates
primarily on GitHub as it has a large and active community of contributors.  As
a result, some content might not be applicable to other similar services.". In
my opinion, if the same reasoning was applied to other topics, the Internet
will become centralized into popular applications without innovation.

The document itself is clear, easy to read, and sensible except for the
overlapping content with the companion document.

Finally, the reason for my ABSTAIN ballot is that I cannot accept that an IETF
document in 2020 proposes to use an IPv4-only commercial web site (see also the
IAB statement https://www.iab.org/2016/11/07/iab-statement-on-ipv6 ). Let's eat
our own dog food. Why not having a git repo on the IETF servers?

-éric

PS: as a side note, I use daily the "git" tools sometimes for private use on
github.com but for professional use on a corporate-run git server.

--- Start of COMMENT ---

General comment: it appears that the two 'git' documents have very similar
content. Was it considered to better split them or merge them?

Section 3.2: a private repository is not free AFAIK with github.com. Which
party will pay for those repos ?

--- End of COMMENT ---