IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] what metric replaces page-count?

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Mon, 12 April 2021 23:15 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 84D613A15F2; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:15:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.751
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.751 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=cryptonector.com
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 seNGglIRkKtp; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:15:02 -0700 (PDT)
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 D851F3A15DC; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:15:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A38BF4076B; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:14:49 -0700 (PDT)
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 70C4AF40768 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.com
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 4kZqQnExWR5x for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:14:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cyan.elm.relay.mailchannels.net (cyan.elm.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.212.47]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 581FAF406F2 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:14:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C1F8542991; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 23:14:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-18-66.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.18.66]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BA0E25422B8; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 23:14:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 100.96.18.66 (trex/6.1.1); Mon, 12 Apr 2021 23:14:56 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Print-Unite: 632735e43b38ac19_1618269296013_2302614412
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1618269296013:1852932098
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1618269296013
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65B3681760; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=sgpU76CKRotaVD 651RWTvFriKPY=; b=h5o6NQ/tQl7uwPooD13xfW+1XzI9w8NHWDNcxoZTeHkoVq g6/nNZyQxS+fMTQzyN/jqj/DMtY8kJgoe5wBzne8oGXRNPLW5W9Y8LW/m3DimwZa Qpcwyge9rJtjlQq1w2lMuZvuIGwHQZlK46itvxhabC8VDhf1fRIKXWBNEZFxI=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2FC807E5FC; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:14:49 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a47
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Message-ID: <20210412231448.GZ9612@localhost>
References: <20557.1618171860@localhost> <F35C8691-ADA2-4DEC-B24A-0DFB5B76567F@tzi.org> <66fd7812-4d2c-bf9d-d4bf-16c501754d7e@gmail.com> <CACB24MtXPct5iOmYSgG5yQVt=-y5=L1nXmkqb4=TsPNfgsQihQ@mail.gmail.com> <4915F484-A2C4-44B0-BAF8-B3CF09D9450F@tzi.org> <CAHw9_iL6wn83-W9t2H1P0o9k3mvir=WdKU164=C24Y53UsiFiw@mail.gmail.com> <D5885B4C-E3A4-4D02-B713-98C962448EE9@vpnc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <D5885B4C-E3A4-4D02-B713-98C962448EE9@vpnc.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] what metric replaces page-count?
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>, tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:32:45AM -0700, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On 12 Apr 2021, at 10:12, Warren Kumari wrote:
> > I really disliked the tone of "Time to move on from..." - I understand
> > that
> > Richard doesn't happen like this metric - but I'm disappointed that,
> > increasingly, if you don't agree with someone in the IETF, the tone
> > pivots
> > to implying that there is something wrong with them, or that they are
> > stupid, or similar...
> 
> A strong +1 to what Warren said. As some of you might remember, I opposed
> the creation of official PDFs because their use should be discouraged in
> normal practice. I still fee that way. However, there's a wide gap between
> "you would likely be better served by the new shiny if you gave it a chance"
> and "you're wrong for wanting the old thing".

Remind me why we're losing pagination?  It's mostly about the tooling,
right?

Feel free to do so off-list to avoid flame war potential.  I do accept
that we're losing pagination.

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email