Re: Question about pre-meeting document posting deadlines for the IESG and the community

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sun, 17 March 2024 04:41 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 5D30FC14F6F7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id avyC_iKICdqq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D9AEC14F5F9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:41:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (dhcp-8777.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.135.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Ty50R4qgnzDCbY; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 05:41:11 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.500.171.1.1\))
Subject: Re: Question about pre-meeting document posting deadlines for the IESG and the community
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <d63997b9-70ef-43be-a660-e861419357b2@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 14:40:58 +1000
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4A5B704B-E74B-41B0-A93D-7991EAF8F6F6@tzi.org>
References: <7826C4F13FA874CD79459A4B@PSB> <65A7921B-2A05-439A-976C-226560C5E7F4@strayalpha.com> <e0702d8a-cea5-4928-b571-98442ccd4f29@petit-huguenin.org> <6d0c6b07-2fc3-496c-ba66-dc40cbf46df8@dfn.de> <69EE71C9-C42B-49A6-BC0D-508F799DB68E@tzi.org> <1d301b86-c994-4a9c-810c-9a42e12a0ad8@network-heretics.com> <53C617FA98D84931861C1F59@PSB> <CAL0qLwbwC4fvu4b3=oyFmOduxHPmTYJRTXBAXFDk9xi+7=FLdA@mail.gmail.com> <05d98ba9-e023-4664-a18a-48ceba2aaed4@network-heretics.com> <2A220CCB-F938-49E2-9D7D-4BA368EB5098@tzi.org> <d63997b9-70ef-43be-a660-e861419357b2@network-heretics.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.500.171.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/zJo1mjihZncDbblykVY7kyFOllM>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF-Discussion. This is the most general IETF mailing list, intended for discussion of technical, procedural, operational, and other topics for which no dedicated mailing lists exist." <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: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 04:41:19 -0000

>> If you don’t like how this goes, please talk to your WG chair; the 
>> details may be subject to adjustment.
> To reiterate, I absolutely do not think that this is something that should vary from one WG to another.  IETF is already too hostile to generalists, and it needs their input badly.

We should have some commonality, which has been started with 8874/8875.

However, one-size-fits-all doesn’t work in the IETF.

Groups vary widely in the workflows that work best for them; groups dominated by people that ship software in their day jobs usually can adapt to git forge based workflows much better than groups centered in different areas of engineering.

I do believe the 2-week moratorium works for all of IETF, because it does not relate to working methods as much as to realities of meetings and traveling to them.
I do not believe a Procrustes edict on WG working methods will work, and that includes how exactly git forges are used.

Grüße, Carsten