RE: Old directions in social media.

Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org> Tue, 05 January 2021 17:21 UTC

Return-Path: <masinter@gmail.com>
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 9D1693A1039 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:21:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 1EwEt9-3rPr0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:21:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1030.google.com (mail-pj1-x1030.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1030]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E79E03A0FB8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:21:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1030.google.com with SMTP id w1so1389690pjc.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Jan 2021 09:21:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-language:thread-index; bh=bARXr3CdZFeNC1bP+pnOHuZqXAQsEmJgxbgN17sjYsE=; b=MbHMKxUusrFZC+2LvEdJ8hxIW4/sp8p+UGiefgZLXPXPm9yDVIevjogHhiC4GdKtCc jrhGTx4RwISrH1ktBI73sBJ7vr6kza8KNSIQriDRdoXiqP0Ro242LPgqMplLzC3uea75 x/LSb5FihUFWWEswW58zN5geImmH137eIVObr+CBKHb+tGRjZDgOSG9L+KpSzVGik2zg 7kZZsSQ12vcaO3eZyH4/9O8xktPXMlCRd3sCSEFYYJc82P5Cs0Xc2NA8ToPegXCwQyVk 7ux8UDn6h2pIuUyulh5eoIdtsn08drPeVUFmklam6kQTzZlN261CzIkyEy7kZwLYMjla ZxZw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject :date:message-id:mime-version:content-language:thread-index; bh=bARXr3CdZFeNC1bP+pnOHuZqXAQsEmJgxbgN17sjYsE=; b=PG3H+xPvNRZrl/LHZh159AjYLGnjeNEW2QXmr3n5BC6dWNgwVKYibvB3BXYdohs2DC qgrGfbalymyWqUk0yEqljt09MwmwlU2gBWdmMPSJvT1eJSsYtiUIB1lC7IJ9Eyv1UNw2 DsHil8zz9cm/twvraklR/+BRNH9Yz88gScGMcIjgPxf90f/hKskWuWlmb9JoLOUU7JJs CM9nKxSrGdf5lnHBy/sC9guUICrnEypckTEy0TB66s8BiGYRsS0BECkEBd/BKAjCJrnZ jQiUdh14wCeypM88TWWgu/yu7tgEacZWaJJ75ym/fsQvO6EmaXVE35IXLAnOiVZlJWcm xjOA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530aJdVAq6cCjnF+vMYa5WEuyp0Qs8DAb/kK+nqXQoj7e6FpKUAs lVs/2IHKcgGIFdy8TAZRWha61HRKaYo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyttqv51idwEdEIY+fPXRVwXlMdlVo9+AmTkd50YE5SjVZW/wHQ/HCDqatbqd5+cyxKq8Ga5g==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:1782:: with SMTP id q2mr224077pja.189.1609867298728; Tue, 05 Jan 2021 09:21:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from TVPC (c-67-169-101-78.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [67.169.101.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o140sm14489pfd.26.2021.01.05.09.21.37 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Jan 2021 09:21:37 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Larry Masinter <masinter@gmail.com>
From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
X-Google-Original-From: "Larry Masinter" <lmm@acm.org>
To: 'Kyle Rose' <krose@krose.org>, 'Keith Moore' <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: 'IETF Discussion Mailing List' <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <CAMm+Lwg1-pxKU8vMinFDUbVca52VgFzTOOSJMnJjaUJvF6PLew@mail.gmail.com> <519a0e4d-7102-fac8-1517-04c590a80080@network-heretics.com> <CAJU8_nUU0Km_YtgpWbLF-JVQVUXFYvxBNBYbzaLOXBqQyvvUaA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJU8_nUU0Km_YtgpWbLF-JVQVUXFYvxBNBYbzaLOXBqQyvvUaA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Old directions in social media.
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2021 09:21:37 -0800
Message-ID: <062d01d6e387$39c46270$ad4d2750$@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_062E_01D6E344.2BA197A0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQGjnLa9mkcIZflkrAC3KJJaPYzCAgHvZyMOAcevEneqYhkDQA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/vit4o17Ro2nKwJiKxCoEe1FLoBQ>
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: Tue, 05 Jan 2021 17:21:42 -0000

I think it’s fine to have the “editing team” of a working group using GitHub (not just “Git” but the whole GitHub infrastructure).

However, GitHub “Discussions” are still in beta, and not as good as a mailing list with carefully chosen Subject lines.

Asking people with architectural questions to couch them in terms of rewriting the spec isn’t much better than
telling them to go fish. This is especially true of “groups” that hold no meetings (unless you want to suggest that

“meetings” – even teleconferencing -- are 1982 technology).

 

It may be a fine way for a group to develop a publicly available specification that group members 
implement in an interoperable way, but why should the IETF have anything to do with it, if the
group process doesn’t admit the typical IETF cross-area industry-wide review by those who are
not so intimately familiar with the detailed vocabulary of the group’s specification to be in a position

to be able & willing to couch their questions in terms of a “Pull Request”?

 

--

 <https://LarryMasinter.net> https://LarryMasinter.net  <https://interlisp.org> https://interlisp.org

 

From: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Kyle Rose
Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 9:08 AM
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Old directions in social media.

 

I do not understand why tools need to be limited by the least common denominator for the IETF as a whole, or limited to 1982 technology. Why is it such a burden to ask people to learn a new tool once every 3 decades or so? Clearly, git (along with related tooling, such as kramdown) is of great value to many because they've spread across the IETF at (for this group) an incredibly rapid pace.

 

IMO, a better response to the challenges posed by useful new tooling is to make it more accessible, not to prohibit it.

 

Kyle

 

 

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:43 AM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com <mailto:moore@network-heretics.com> > wrote:

On 1/4/21 12:40 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

 

I have seen groups trying to use git and I really wish they would stop. Using git to run a WG provides a small amount of tool support for issues tracking which is useful. But the tool is designed to do a very different job and has its own bizarre vocabulary. Telling people to enter comments as 'Pull Requests' causes most people's mental gears to grind. The result is WGs whose activities are unhappily split between a Web site and a mailing list with no cohesion between the two.

+1