Re: [netmod] Joint WGLC on "semver" and "module-versioning" drafts

[Robert Varga <[e-mail]>]

On 09/05/2023 00.49, Kent Watsen wrote:
> Dear NETMOD WG,
> 
> This message begins a joint two-week WGLC for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-semver-11 and draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning-09
>   ending on Monday, May 22nd.  Neither draft has IPR declared.  Here are the direct links to the HTML version for these drafts:
> 
>     - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-semver-11
>     - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning-09
> 
> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome!  This is useful and important, even from authors.  Objections, concerns, and suggestions are also welcomed at this time.

Hello, I have reviewed the module-versioning draft and overall it looks 
fine (well, aside from the incoming pain :), but we'll cope with that in 
due time).

One concern I have is with 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning-09#name-file-names, 
which changes file naming.

Previously the canonical file name included revision -- and now that 
information is lost. While I understand the desire for descriptive 
names, which are a boon for humans, the until the entire ecosystem 
adopts labels, this change is either-or -- and hence tools have to pick 
which metadata is more important: label or revision.

Would it be possible to define a format which contains *both* the label 
and revision, so as not to pick favorites?

Thanks,
Robert