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

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Mon, 15 August 2011 19:48 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: iola-wgcharter-tool@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iola-wgcharter-tool@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75D6F21F8CE7 for <iola-wgcharter-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.225
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1eJjEKcln3s1 for <iola-wgcharter-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:48:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FE7D21F8CE5 for <iola-wgcharter-tool@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dn3-177.estacado.net (vicuna-alt.estacado.net [75.53.54.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (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 rjsparks@nostrum.com)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E493959.8000301@levkowetz.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 14:49:21 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3127A388-A7F4-4228-9D60-D444F2325781@nostrum.com>
References: <4E493959.8000301@levkowetz.com>
To: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 75.53.54.121 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 04:20:20 -0700
Cc: iola-wgcharter-tool@ietf.org, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Subject: Re: [iola-wgcharter-tool] Charter-tool demo
X-BeenThere: iola-wgcharter-tool@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the IOLA / WG Charter Tool Project <iola-wgcharter-tool.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iola-wgcharter-tool>, <mailto:iola-wgcharter-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/iola-wgcharter-tool>
List-Post: <mailto:iola-wgcharter-tool@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iola-wgcharter-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iola-wgcharter-tool>, <mailto:iola-wgcharter-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 19:48:40 -0000

Martin: 

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?

RjS

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 <martin@iola.dk>
> To: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
> CC: Ole Laursen <olau@iola.dk>
> 
> Hi Henrik
> 
> I've prepared a demo site for the charter tool. You can access it at 
> http://beta.iola.dk:10003
> 
> 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 http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff. 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
> 
>