Re: [rfc-i] [Ietf-and-github] New Version Notification for draft-kwatsen-git-xiax-automation-00.txt

Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com> Tue, 26 February 2019 17:25 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2645130EE3 for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:25:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vw521j_x1bAf for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:25:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D85DE12D4EB for <rfc-interest-archive-eekabaiReiB1@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:25:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21262B824BF; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:25:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6F6B824BD for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:25:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YQQMoohrSm7Y for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:25:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:126c::1:2a]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11A12B824BC for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:25:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from h-202-242.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([158.174.202.242]:49524 helo=tannat.localdomain) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <henrik@levkowetz.com>) id 1gygU4-0004NL-Gs; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:25:37 -0800
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
References: <155112114000.10633.2593235416875795961.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <01000169261421c7-978ecbf5-dcc4-4738-ba58-f409ce6adaf1-000000@email.amazonses.com> <2e4a853c-6622-81e8-adf5-02deb3e1d6e3@gmx.de> <010001692a9f8f0f-a4ba1870-6959-4518-8503-6e30424b1ac9-000000@email.amazonses.com> <ea32731b-55cf-aa67-a87a-184dfbad6d49@gmx.de> <010001692ab8ef80-96b79bab-c831-4917-b5a2-edc3a37ab952-000000@email.amazonses.com> <c0ecb9bc-793e-fa36-c916-1027ec12ddea@joelhalpern.com>
From: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
Message-ID: <ef58bede-02b8-dcb8-1ffd-eef921e9a715@levkowetz.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 18:25:28 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c0ecb9bc-793e-fa36-c916-1027ec12ddea@joelhalpern.com>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 158.174.202.242
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ietf-and-github@ietf.org, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, julian.reschke@gmx.de, kent+ietf@watsen.net, jmh@joelhalpern.com
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] [Ietf-and-github] New Version Notification for draft-kwatsen-git-xiax-automation-00.txt
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>, ietf-and-github@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6806272627326476972=="
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Hi Joel,

On 2019-02-26 18:19, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> RFC 5377 section 4.3 calls out that code has different copyright grants 
> than other parts of the document.  It describes various examples of 
> code, and then asks the IETF Trust to specify textual marking for code 
> so that authors can be explicit and can mark things that may not be 
> obvious by the examples.
> 
> So it goes back a lot earlier than 6087.
> And as far as I know goes back to before there was any tooling support 
> for the markings.

Indeed.  And later, when there was discussion about possible code markings,
I proposed that we use the <CODE BEGINS>, <CODE ENDS> introduced by RFC 6087,
rather than inventing something new.

Regards,

	Henrik

> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 2/26/19 11:52 AM, Kent Watsen wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> The original reason for "CODE BEGINS" etc was for licensing (to 
>>> clarify that part of the content is considered to be a "code component").
>> 
>> 
>> Perhaps and, if so, then the markers may still have a purpose.
>> 
>> That said, I only know the markers coming from 
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8407#section-3.2, which came from 
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6087#section-3.1.   As the co-chair and 
>> shepherd for these drafts, I assure you that my limited understanding 
>> for the original motivation is correct.   It's not intended to have any 
>> relationship to copyrights, though RFC6087 conflates both a module-level 
>> copyright (inside the YANG module) and markers (outside the YANG module) 
>> in Section 3.1, which we de-conflicted in RFC8407.
>> 
>> Kent
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf-and-github mailing list
>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> 

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest