Re: Old directions in social media.

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 12:09 PM Kyle Rose <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 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
>

Since the Open Meeting requires a Lisp Machine to run (!) I was not
suggesting that we adopt that. What I said is that I am starting to build a
tool for my own purposes, namely the ability to hold end-to-end encrypted
collaborations in environments that require a higher level of security
including classified and SCI environments. I am not aware of github being
used for those purposes.

My problem with using git/github as a process driven collaboration tool is
that github is designed to perform an entirely different task. So the
effect is like someone telling you to use a screwdriver as a hammer and
ignoring the complaints from people pointing out its a bad match. That
doesn't mean it isn't the best tool available at the moment but it is not a
good tool for that purpose because thats not what it is for.