Re: [iola-conversion-tool] Secretariat user experience

[Ole Laursen <[e-mail]>]

2012/2/7 Cindy Morgan <[e-mail]>:
> While logged in to https://tracker.tools.ietf.org/ as a Secretariat user:
> - Add a link to Management Items (currently https://datatracker.ietf.org/admin/iesg/telechatagendaitem/ on the production server) under the Secretariat heading in the sidebar.

Sure, I've done that.

> - On the telechat dates page, I like that we can add a whole slew of dates at once now, instead of being stuck with 4 at a time; and yes, the "suggest latest date + 14" feature works.  But without the "Rollup" function that we currently have, how does the IESG agenda get set up for the next telechat with the right date at the top and the right set of documents?

Hm, good point. The current code has a set of telechat dates it
considers active, those that are either today or later. It uses them
in the same way as the old 4 dates. So if today is 2012-02-08 with
these dates

 2012-01-25  - inactive
 2012-02-08  - active
 2012-02-22  - active

then the agenda shown will be for 2012-02-08 because it's the first
active date. And tomorrow it will show the agenda for 2012-02-22. So
it's like an automatic roll-up at the end of the day. Do you think
this is fine?

> - Will the Secretariat still need to remove documents from the IESG agenda after the telechat in order to set up for the next one, or is that no longer necessary?

I'm glad you asked because the way we model this, it shouldn't be
necessary anymore. I just fixed some wrapper code to make it say the
right thing when you go to the page for a draft so I think this should
work.

> - I moved draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-bulk-leasequery-05 from the 2012-02-16 agenda to the 2012-03-29 agenda using https://tracker.tools.ietf.org/iesg/agenda/documents/, and the document showed up on the 2012-03-29 agenda as a returning item, even though it is not a returning item.

Hm, yes, this doesn't make much sense. It's trying to guess whether
the draft has become a returning item or not, and failing. If I remove
all automatic guessing and the "Clear returning item" check box and
instead add a "Returning item" check box like the one in the document
edit page, would that be better? So you'd have a check box that
reflects the current status of the document and if you need to turn it
into a returning item, you can then check it.

> - Looking at the announcement text for individual documents (e.g. https://tracker.tools.ietf.org/doc/draft-kucherawy-authres-spf-erratum/edit/approvaltext/), it looks like system plans to try and CC the announcement to [e-mail].  I would guess it's trying that because the WG is set to "none" for individual submissions, but that address is going to bounce.

Odd, fixed.

> - I tried to regenerate the approval announcement text on draft-irtf-hiprg-proxies and got an error.  (Originally, the text that was there was for a regular IETF stream doc, but I hadn't checked the "Via IRTF or RFC Editor" box when adding the doc, even though the stream menu was set to "IRTF.")  After checking the box, I tried to regenerate the announcement to see if the correct text appeared, and got this error:

Fixed. This case was missing in the automated tests we have running,
I've added it now.

Great testing!


Ole