Re: sr.ht --- "sir hat" --- alternatives to Github

[Richard Barnes <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 6:32 PM Hector Santos <hsantos=
[e-mail]> wrote:

> My opinion.
>
> My only concern is the perception that the IETF is now "requiring" to
> learn a new suite of 3rd party tools for a single purpose - RFC Draft
> submissions publishing.


We already ask people to learn tools!  Have you tried working with a
newcomer through the arcana of xml2rfc?

On the contrary, when I've been working with newcomer coauthors on a draft
in GitHub, and I mention making a new I-D, they're like "Why do we need to
make a special version for IETF?"

To Michael's point, this doesn't advocate for GitHub in particular.  But
clearly wherever possible, we should prefer the tools that contributors
know.  That's how we get the bottom-up contributions we're supposed to
value in this organization.  Personally, my experience is that the people
who are contributing to the stuff I'm working on know GitHub.

--Richard



> For people doing this all the time, and
> probably also using the same tools for other parts of their career, I
> can understand it would be productive, but not for the occasional author.
>
> After several decades, I believe an application level IETF online RFC
> publishing tool should be available.  In the past, I used XML2RFC (a
> java app) to outline, produce and publish my drafts. Isn't this
> available any more?   I would think a HTML5 version would be doable
> today, and of course, some vcs would be integrated at the backend.
>
> I personally don't want wish to be learning git details and all the
> other scripting tools and text formats for a single purpose.  I would
> if I have to at some top level rudimentary level just to get the job,
> but it is not desirable, and certainly not a career requirement for me.
>
> I entered this thread only because I do plan to write a few drafts and
> so it was interesting to see the discussion and more people using
> GitHub not only for IETF drafts publishing but also for other things
> like as a common web site to illustrate ideas and concepts.  I rather
> not see that become the norm, but it does shows people need sharable
> tools and web sites within the IETF for IETF purposes.
>
> --
> HLS
>
> On 1/22/2019 5:04 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> >
> > (Wow, what a lot of emails about how everyone should have choice, as
> long as
> > they choose github.)
> >
> > The reason I posted about sr.ht is that I strongly feel that authors
> should
> > be using some kind of revision control for your xml or markdown files,
> and
> > that they should have some automation for formatting them (whether
> Richard's
> > wonderful Makefile, five line ones, or a shell script).  I don't care
> what
> > people use, but it's hard to host CVS, ClearCase, Mercurial, SVN, etc.
> unless
> > you have some routable public address space of your own.  Finding places
> > that support
> >
> > There are some people who like git, but don't like the social networking
> > aspects and issue tracking portion, and want all of this to happen on our
> > mailing lists.   There are some for whom the lack of native IPv6 is
> really
> > embarassing.   (I use NAT64 and DNS64 to access github...)
> >
> > I saw sr.ht as an answer for those people.  (It doesn't have an IPv6
> yet either)
> > There are also a bunch of people who use bitbucket, as basically storage.
> >
> > I have personally been using git and a simple Makefile to manage my
> drafts
> > for more than a decade.  I have taught quite a few people this process.
> > I'm really glad that this part has taken off.
> >
> > While I use github an aweful lot as a way to keep track of things with my
> > co-authors, I don't particularly like or want to accept new issues that
> way.
> > I *way* prefer to have a cogent email on the WG ML, *followed* by a pull
> > request, ideally with the core of the suggestion in the ML.
> > While I'm not as old as some, I'm clearly not young anymore.
> >
> > I see the web interface as often a distraction.  Semi-technical
> > (i.e. writers with a non-developers background, and young developers who
> > never left an IDE) think that github *is* git, and don't take the half a
> day
> > to actually learn to use git.  I've been through this *repeatedly* in
> other
> > fora.  Having said that, let me repeat that I *do* use github for many
> > things.  But not all things.
> >
> > --
> > Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
> >   -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> >
>
>
>
>