Re: A sad farewell

[Larry Masinter <[e-mail]>]

which group in IETF or the LLC or ISOC or whatever is chartered to discuss
such long-term issues, though? It's out of scope for SHMOO, Is IETF
committed to having a unique (bespoke, open-source?) toolchain?
I think IETF toolchains should meet the old standard for standards:
multiple, independent, interoperable implementations.  Multiple = more than
one = not bespoke (unless you mean that term in some other way?



On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 3:45 PM Pete Resnick <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 5 Nov 2020, at 17:08, Larry Masinter wrote:
>
> While github isn't THE answer, the "bespoke tools" developed to support
> legacy workflows really DON'T matter that much.
> Google Docs, Dropbox, Microsoft Office, Acrobat, git.ietf.org might all
> be options.
>
> Right now, IETF is in the unenviable position of imposing a serious tax of
> attention for people who don't care about text formats to make a
> contribution.
>
> Larry, I apologize if this sounds harsh, but text formats have almost
> nothing to do with the bespoke tools and I don't think you really
> understand how our toolchain is being used or the breadth of functions
> being provided. Do any of the tools on your list, *without bespoke
> customization*, support working group document management along these
> lines?
>
>    - a tree of state management (with different trees for WG vs AD
>    management; if you haven't looked at the document state tree, you should
>    before answering the question)
>    - balloting by IESG, which integrates heavily with state management
>    - integration with meeting agendas (such that documents can appear as
>    topic items, meeting materials can be managed, calendars can show pointers
>    to those items and online meeting calls)...
>    - role-based ACL (ability to change different attributes or edit the
>    document depending on whether you're the AD, chair, doc editor, doc
>    shepherd, participant, review team member, etc.)
>    - review team assignments with due-date reminders and templates /
>    forms for reviews
>
> And the list goes on and on. Again, the text format of the documents has
> little to nothing to do with these issues.
>
> If you're simply saying we should adjust our workflow to conform to some
> other tool, that seems completely backwards and I think the suggestion is
> misguided. If you're saying that it will just take some customizations of
> these other tools to accomplish what we want, I think you wildly
> underestimate the amount of customization that will be needed.
>
> Yes, there are loads of ways we can and probably should integrate things
> like git document management and other editing tools into our toolchain.
> And the tools team has done those sorts of integrations for many years. But
> the suggestion that it is so simply replaced is seriously misunderstanding
> the tools we have and our workflows.
>
> pr
> --
> Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
> All connections to the world are tenuous at best
>


-- 
--
https://LarryMasinter.net <http://larry.masinter.net>