Re: [TLS] TLS WG GitHub interaction

David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 21 October 2020 23:09 UTC

Return-Path: <dschinazi.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABCB83A0B6B for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:09:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 dFxqosQM6Yoz for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AEF23A0B79 for <TLS@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id h20so4343334lji.9 for <TLS@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lyZHXTv/47n/3IJT1MZoMfoqMMIecx8cJwGlm0d/djc=; b=A/ItE5M9KwDITxT5nYSmfmctv5yinNsUmpvbCkd16QD87p64+TQgnGoGVeembU6S4J iU/U5MjlKVGa4PpZccurt8RHhKIpGWSSGyeUscRQrsL1ba3cDkpD5czTPEMMZvqSBhC5 0R43v1me34ouUXxHMbOLSSc+RmouDwAyKbIKv9VzXn4TtlV/AcUFBMD9AwXx8mwo7yuq er41nhRS2yrQgjgEtetQLvtQG0ryOiutA7K9ReufXoBbjijKJbfiq7/hfXB9NECkIKT5 xYgQ8bZ/AKMVsG/6OQHY6dd8CXoB31y6BrtxVjon81W1iFQ8wkkZJDVAA23zVv2tMczj +40g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lyZHXTv/47n/3IJT1MZoMfoqMMIecx8cJwGlm0d/djc=; b=GNY3vJ+rzGypDSeUgv/ZSQ5m2Ig0Fqu9IGZYYKX83wyivxV6UhORBFXo5M3dFGoLQI /GzcOlxH7Rg2hgsor1wdNEQ2GQvRbewYj+D+PW9Jtw6Xih22NasoHspVqTQ4rQ91jZsX Kuk41cYsK/gFB10JbA+YL8nH40IEpt6Pv53k2nf9eSqzMkg0U6Vv/uZ7Qv5mA5frqelN YnbbewNwiNLyKf/E0pR62yB0orH3eYAVcLjQcmZaO7vC2c1yzPXCu4fwwkZjAJ9lUp0+ 7AT5J0wGx4r+zKEJll/s+Ral6JnwUnabuSGFyc0vMvhwwJj1WndnTHByPyBji1TLivoO 68Qg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531D1ndReFru/dbNqsJhLm6QVwrjEYD/RBUnqbqFX8QvJ/2Sgmij COX86UYbdRYcZi+1NIbmy4AE8W1BJG9v9K0mbO0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyzSvRNYNcHBUk7//3y1r5BfI8bLZrNc8rKrE6n6NjNX4BJB35r2eEbzNfmXzuGd8N8iYbSGLJg5WRRrbrDYu8=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7a0a:: with SMTP id v10mr2140528ljc.188.1603321766601; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:09:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <ca1ba518-7195-415a-8729-3ce60724f5ff@www.fastmail.com> <CABcZeBOaOAUwLcZhK8+s5T9sL-D+Ohchdn6xJi1rObFhi_2kgQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBOaOAUwLcZhK8+s5T9sL-D+Ohchdn6xJi1rObFhi_2kgQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:09:15 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPDSy+73b23kAGMs2gYzNqy52szuVLaH8=DwP=LPfyc5y5y_bw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Cc: Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>, "TLS@ietf.org" <TLS@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005be96405b2367089"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/k8fQ37p53XhD7753Kz7WYrIvmbw>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS WG GitHub interaction
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 23:09:37 -0000

+1, issue discussion mode with email summaries sounds like the best option

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 4:08 PM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 3:51 PM Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>
> wrote:
>
>> RFC 8874 describes several different methods for using GitHub, ranging
>> from the lightweight "document management mode" [1] to more heavyweight
>> "issue discussion mode" [2]. Most TLS documents are hosted and worked on in
>> GitHub, though with varying levels of interaction. For example, some
>> interact with GitHub in "issue tracking mode," wherein editors primarily
>> use GitHub for tracking open issues. Others interact with GitHub in a way
>> that resembles "issue discussion mode," wherein substantive issue
>> discussion takes place on GitHub issues and consensus calls occur on the
>> list.
>>
>> This discrepancy has caused confusion in the past, especially with
>> respect to how best to stay engaged in the continued development of WG
>> documents. Moreover, with the rising rate at which other WGs and IETF
>> participants adopt GitHub for document development, especially those formed
>> in recent years, we have not made expectations for use of GitHub clear.
>>
>> To that end, after observing what's been maximally productive for
>> document development in TLS and related WGs, taking into account community
>> engagement, document review support, and editor tools, we propose the
>> following: the TLS WG interact with WG documents in "issue discussion
>> mode," following the approach outlined in [3].
>>
>> We'd like to hear whether folks are support or oppose this proposal.
>> Please chime in (on the list!) and share your thoughts before November 4.
>> We'll determine whether there is consensus to adopt this new approach
>> moving forward at that time.
>>
>
> I am in favor of using "issue discussion mode". When we developed our
> current structure, we had less experience with Github and it was reasonable
> to be cautious, but I believe that now we have enough experience to support
> the use of "issue discussion mode".
>
> -Ekr
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Chris, on behalf of the chairs
>>
>> [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc8874.html#name-document-management-mode
>> [2] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc8874.html#name-issue-labeling-schemes
>> [3] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc8874.html#name-issue-discussion-mode
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TLS mailing list
>> TLS@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>