Re: [Tools-discuss] Expiry Doctrine (Re: Expired draft on the w.g. status pages [was Re: disappearing IDs on www.ietf.org])

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sat, 12 September 2020 21:51 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675173A0942 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 14:51:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 5VS1KnIm2mYh for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 14:50:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E42B93A093C for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 14:50:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.102] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BpmXK330YzyhG; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 23:50:57 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <16c77153-dd60-c241-1666-b3a9ab9d4e62@nostrum.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 23:50:57 +0200
Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 621640256.989251-68dcff3f816a0a45baec5863a4624aa1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D5EC02A0-08E2-4819-8FD8-F5E76AC6AA07@tzi.org>
References: <8657.1599751932@localhost> <84c8d593-c7b6-4327-338f-9b2b0e7a36e0@levkowetz.com> <0C6D4DE2-F9F3-4C7C-8427-264F34C8C2B7@tzi.org> <26d795d2-3761-2950-4346-62f849d86eed@nostrum.com> <7792.1599768579@localhost> <C73D6AB9-694E-458E-AEEE-45DBDEF623C5@vigilsec.com> <3B281EED-CDCE-4025-8C78-7BA689490936@tzi.org> <5B0C691F-EA59-44E9-959F-52445CA58314@gmail.com> <41EEFFCD-DEB9-4950-95B1-F43ACC73CAF1@vigilsec.com> <2F82E43A-39CF-4C99-BE9E-CD84D2BE21B3@gmail.com> <C44C644D-C24A-4839-BB61-F758AA2D7BF1@vigilsec.com> <BCB7C223-EFDE-46D3-A4E2-82068C688547@tzi.org> <16c77153-dd60-c241-1666-b3a9ab9d4e62@nostrum.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/2Wkgaa3SdPKZBEXWoRXJNvGfDdw>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Expiry Doctrine (Re: Expired draft on the w.g. status pages [was Re: disappearing IDs on www.ietf.org])
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 21:51:01 -0000

On 2020-09-12, at 18:57, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote:
> 
> The archive is _all_ drafts, not just expired ones - the active ones are there too. It is the stable thing you are asking for already. The question I'm hearing is do we point more things at that by default.

Yes, I should have made this more clear.

Still, the archive does not tell me what the current status is — it only has the (mostly wrong) expiry language in it.

(People do get upset quickly when the legacy tools scripts manage to miss a status update on a tools I-D, for good reasons.)

So, yes, I’ll continue to rsync over the archive, but I also would like to have a web page I can hand out links to that combines the archived I-D with information about whether it is current, has been updated, replaced, expired, published as an RFC, etc.  And I would like that web page to be the canonical home of an I-D.

Grüße, Carsten