IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RANT: posting IDs more often -- more is better -- why are we so shy?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 07 March 2017 03:33 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DEC812965A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 19:33:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 em0FxaiFM1-T for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 19:33:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6A1F12956B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 19:33:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAAC6E22D; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 22:56:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBED9636BB; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 22:33:36 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "ietf@ietf.org Disgust" <ietf@ietf.org>, Lloyd Wood <l.wood@society.surrey.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: RANT: posting IDs more often -- more is better -- why are we so shy?
In-Reply-To: <1446835575.4118830.1488776805137@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <14476.1488384266@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <CAHw9_iKuZrxD=51QadPPnuofUdAeaHPQ4JvONz5Bno3HTAi71A@mail.gmail.com> <1446835575.4118830.1488776805137@mail.yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 22:33:36 -0500
Message-ID: <21082.1488857616@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/QLRLipNbzGy0FY8Je8tgw-6dsag>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 03:33:39 -0000

Lloyd Wood <L.Wood@society.surrey.ac.uk> wrote:
    > Those advocating 'early and often' might consider the case of
    > WhatWG, hybi, Ian Hickson, and his working style, as shown by
    > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hixie-thewebsocketprotocol-76

    > where it became impossible to figure out what had changed,
    > whether it was important, or really, anything other than the
    > way Hixie wanted to work, and that the WG really didn't like
    > how they were expected to run.

    > Diffs aren't useful unless they're of source.

Agreed: too many revisions is also a problem.
I think that the WG can push back.

Was it useful to diff version 60 against version 76?


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status