Re: [iola-wgcharter-tool] Charter-tool demo

Robert Sparks <> Mon, 15 August 2011 19:48 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75D6F21F8CE7 for <>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.225
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.225 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_43=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100, WEIRD_PORT=0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1eJjEKcln3s1 for <>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:48:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FE7D21F8CE5 for <>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7FJnLsp017856 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 15 Aug 2011 14:49:22 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Robert Sparks <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 14:49:21 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Henrik Levkowetz <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Received-SPF: pass ( is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 04:20:20 -0700
Cc:, Russ Housley <>
Subject: Re: [iola-wgcharter-tool] Charter-tool demo
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the IOLA / WG Charter Tool Project <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 19:48:40 -0000


Overall the UI seems to be going in a reasonable direction (based on what I could exercise so far).
I like the rot13 example charter text :).

Two quick observations:

I had recently removed the "Change State" button from the IESG portion of the tracker, replacing it's functionality
by turning the state name into a link (when it made sense to edit it).

On the question of naming charters below (XX-YY, etc.) - I can't tell if you're proposing something different
than what's in section 2.3 of RFC 6292?


On Aug 15, 2011, at 10:20 AM, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:

> Hi,
> Please read below -- a demo site (not alpha or beta yet, this is
> for feedback on the UI) of the WG charter tool is now available.
> Do we have any eager test drivers?
> Best regards,
> 	Henrik
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Charter-tool demo
> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:33:32 +0200
> From: Martin Qvist <>
> To: Henrik Levkowetz <>
> CC: Ole Laursen <>
> Hi Henrik
> I've prepared a demo site for the charter tool. You can access it at 
> The WG Records can be found under Other Documents in the menu, and 
> there's a dummy group with acronym iolchat, that shows the features of a 
> record (previous acronyms, etc.). WG Records are accessed as 
> /wgrecord/acronym and previous acronyms of a WG redirect to the current 
> acronym. You can change the state of the group as well as edit the 
> fields. The IESG Review and IESG Writeups tabs don't yet work, and the 
> History tab is only partially functional. This is mostly for feedback on 
> the UI. Let me know what you think.
> A couple of questions have also arisen:
> * Since the charter tool changes Group objects I wanted to hear about
>   how this tool should interact with wginfo. For instance, once a
>   proposed group is approved (changes state to WG Exists) should it
>   automatically change to Active group and show up in wginfo?
>   Additionally, when a group is rechartered, I'm supposing that the
>   wginfo view of the group should show the group as it was before the
>   rechartering process, and only update once the rechartering process
>   is finished (and should this also be automatic, once the state
>   becomes WG Exists?).
> * Although the RFC states that only the names on the chairs,
>   secretaries, etc. of a group be shown, the tool uses Email (you can
>   see it in edit). Should the email be shown in the WG record?
> * Does the shepherding AD refer to the AD that takes part in the review
>   process of the charter (i.e. shepherd in Document) or the AD of the
>   group (i.e. ad in Group)? My guess was ad on Group.
> * The RFC only asks for Mailing list email and archive, however, a
>   subscribe address is also part of the Group model. Should this be
>   part of the WG record?
> * Regarding the annotations Initial chartering and Rechartering of the
>   states: where/how should these be displayed?
> * In section 5.1 of the RFC it states that you should be able to search
>   based on "text in any of the fields". Does this include the charter
>   text (content)?
> * Regarding the charter texts:
>   - I've named the charter Document objects with name: charter-
>     ietf-example-XX and revision: YY. I initially though of using
>     revision XX-YY, but this was there can be a ballot and iesg_process
>     for each charter-ietf-example-XX. This also makes it easier to
>     maintain wginfo during a chartering proces (it could just show
>     charter-ietf-example-YY that has revision None). Are you ok with
>     this?
>   - Submission of the charter texts isn't part of the RFC. Will it be
>     done with /submit/? Or is it done manually with /admin/?
>   - The quickest way of setting up diff'ing of the charters would
>     probably be to reuse What do you
>     think?
> Finally, I've changed Working Group in the AD Dashboard, so that it now 
> resembles My Documents more. You can't yet create a WG record, but it 
> shows what I had in mind.
> All the code is in the repository if you want to have a look.
> Best,
> Martin