Re: [iola-conversion-tool] Protocol Action vs. Document Action Messages

Cindy Morgan <cmorgan@amsl.com> Fri, 24 February 2012 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <cmorgan@amsl.com>
X-Original-To: iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C46221F87B0 for <iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:54:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.893
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.295, BAYES_00=-2.599, HS_INDEX_PARAM=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Sfk0P7mBjgdo for <iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:54:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFCAE21F8794 for <iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:54:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45A6212C8B8; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:54:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jMduDWK4hOIM; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:54:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.1.3] (c-24-6-24-11.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.6.24.11]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E49B312C8B2; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:54:08 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Cindy Morgan <cmorgan@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F47DADE.3000900@levkowetz.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:54:09 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BD634DBF-ABCF-4E89-836D-6E4AC8E5C49F@amsl.com>
References: <8FFE1251-A16C-49A9-93E2-32F1F6392D11@amsl.com> <CANb2OvJw7KmwcnyTEoo_S0mxjgOtvZ_8ZKe-kEjxV+M7ncuvNw@mail.gmail.com> <11ED5602-C7D7-4FD6-AAAC-4E1423DD5651@amsl.com> <CANb2OvJbsVxxn0shL8bNTuNktWAZD2tRydb3OfrB5Ayb+_b1MA@mail.gmail.com> <4F47DADE.3000900@levkowetz.com>
To: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Ole Laursen <olau@iola.dk>, iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [iola-conversion-tool] Protocol Action vs. Document Action Messages
X-BeenThere: iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the IOLA / DB Schema Conversion Tool Project <iola-conversion-tool.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iola-conversion-tool>, <mailto:iola-conversion-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/iola-conversion-tool>
List-Post: <mailto:iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iola-conversion-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iola-conversion-tool>, <mailto:iola-conversion-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 18:54:11 -0000

On Feb 24, 2012, at 10:45 AM, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
> On 2012-02-24 18:38 Ole Laursen said the following:
>> 2012/2/24 Cindy Morgan <cmorgan@amsl.com>om>:
>>>> I'm not sure what exactly went wrong but the code was looking at the
>>>> indefinite article of the intended status which is really odd. Instead
>>>> I now just compare it with your list.
>>> 
>>> FWIW, whatever is being used to tell the difference between Protocol and Document Actions on the IESG agenda (https://trackerbeta.ietf.org/iesg/agenda/?private) does seem to be working as it should.
>> 
>> Yes, I had a closer look, and I can see now why it broke (it
>> accidentally got the intended status without the indefinite article).
>> Anyway, choosing between Procotol/Document Action based on whether the
>> intended status should be prefixed with "an" or "a" is brittle. Future
>> generations of IETF code base maintainers will thank us for getting
>> rid of that abomination.
>> 
>>> But I just checked several docs listed on the agenda as Document Actions*, and their approval announcement text is still being generated as Protocol Actions.
>>> 
>>> * draft-ietf-v6ops-v6nd-problems
>>> draft-snell-atompub-tombstones
>>> draft-ietf-lisp-interworking
>>> draft-ietf-behave-64-analysis
>> 
>> Ah, sorry, we need to wait a second for Henrik to deploy the update. I
>> did check it on my local server, and I think we're good, but would
>> appreciate if you would try it too when he's deployed it.
> 
> Fix deployed!  (I was en-route home, via a number of shops).


And fix confirmed--all of the docs on the agenda that should be Document Actions are now generating their approval announcements as such. Thank you!

Cindy