IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Things that used to be clear (was Re: Evolving Documents (nee "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.)

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 05 July 2019 20:14 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 8A92712011B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 13:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 ZVDCBXZvqWaM for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 13:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
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 8A1C4120119 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 13:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:56b2:3ff:fe0b:d84]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85BC438196 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 16:12:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39710B26 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 16:14:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Things that used to be clear (was Re: Evolving Documents (nee "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.)
In-Reply-To: <20190705192404.GM3508@localhost>
References: <CABcZeBOw6w2tm4YYFdmLwC23ufPDupt2D1Vzwjn4Pi9bbf6R-w@mail.gmail.com> <20190704192057.GI3508@localhost> <CABcZeBMC-VRfea3YqLSs6yhtEq4VtfdO5L56v87KH=vMR4y=+A@mail.gmail.com> <5c9048ef-ba2b-a362-3941-82eacc664b64@mnt.se> <CABcZeBPv8xUMbSt+SDL_X56SBB_CPyBMKZaQMbPd=6M-xT+hpQ@mail.gmail.com> <19233.1562339969@localhost> <20190705163101.GJ3508@localhost> <E49856E1-4DBC-488E-AE15-D48B5357E61D@fugue.com> <20190705172833.GK3508@localhost> <9208.1562354038@localhost> <20190705192404.GM3508@localhost>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+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: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 16:14:51 -0400
Message-ID: <23197.1562357691@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/juRy2dEcbB2b8CjeHFHibw_EzBI>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 20:14:55 -0000

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
    >> Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
    >> > Now, I don't know how to incentivize the wider community to provide
    >> > interim reviews.  Reviewing I-Ds is really time-consuming and energy
    >> > sapping for me personally -- the biggest problem is making the time and
    >> > finding a way to get it funded when it's a lot of time.
    >>
    >> This is why I wanted to have the list of structured reviews encoded in the
    >> XML so that the datatracker and rfc-editor pages could at least provide a
    >> kudos here.

    > Yes, certainly better tooling for review formalism will help.

    > So if I am asked to review draft-ietf-foowg-xyz-11 and I can see that
    > there was an interim review at -07, I can start by reading that review,
    > then reading -11, then examining the differences between -07 and -11.

Gosh, I hadn't thought about recording a link to the review.
I just wanted to give kudos.  Recording a link to the review is a great idea,
and deals with some of the question of who gets a acknowledgement and who
doesn't.

    > Moreover, recording the review history, complete with links to mailing
    > list archives (even if review were to happen in github or similar,
    > provided we have notifications go to an IETF list, then we can use that
    > as the record), in the datatracker, will greatly help anyone doing RFC
    > archeology later on.

+1

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email