IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tools-discuss] Datatracker 8.3.1 deployed

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Mon, 29 August 2022 15:13 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
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 457EFC147930 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Aug 2022 08:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.087
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OFysd45uOqL0 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Aug 2022 08:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FFF8C14792E for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Aug 2022 08:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] ([47.186.48.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPSA id 27TFDcQH045920 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 29 Aug 2022 10:13:39 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1661786020; bh=9pg03TzkrdgPOXc/nVaR562Gr3ZFY588KvfdO+K1TJ0=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:From:Subject:In-Reply-To; b=mYcX8q76pwdMcGRnfGkgYAAgDNYLpaywXqo9zrBvAFZme89JGCXY0OVTumulJmHIz y7NDOVdtBJEyETeM721Xr6KoX6VsziwXfSAtX5nLiYwMhRvZWOEKBNg8bVHnJ21KVi mYs75qiW548v4OU0+4d5VoXNO0Zqlxj+ydTOLSMo=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.48.51] claimed to be [192.168.1.102]
Message-ID: <a8ba495c-73a2-6a27-bb29-8246047265a1@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 10:13:33 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.12.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
References: <bafdfadc-e988-bb9d-9f80-634621d7fc0b@nostrum.com> <3B0D2196-0A52-42CE-9306-D58E9D31C026@tzi.org> <d2221457-aed1-f15a-919e-7ffe94518e3a@nostrum.com> <7DFC44B2-B2A6-4F6B-B38B-F3A50551664C@tzi.org>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <7DFC44B2-B2A6-4F6B-B38B-F3A50551664C@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/4C8uDbOjs-o97ivlKfDlA2F33HI>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Datatracker 8.3.1 deployed
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 15:13:45 -0000

On 8/29/22 9:29 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On 29. Aug 2022, at 15:52, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote:
>> So, what breakage, in particular, are you trying to hunt down?
> https://github.com/ietf-tools/bibxml-service/issues/280#issuecomment-1230388957

Fascinating.

(To save others digging, right now

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bibxml3/draft-ietf-tsvwg-l4s-arch.xml

and

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bibxml3/draft-ietf-tsvwg-l4s-arch-20.xml

return different results (specifically around author name 
decomposition), which is not expected.

I'll go work on the issues and try to reduce the confusion around what's 
reported where.

This particular bug is rooted in the code-path passing the Document 
object to the template in one case, and the most recent DocHistory 
object in the other, and these things have different knowledge of the 
Submission object that led to the version. It's not clear to me _why_ we 
have this distinction in this particular code flow, and I'll look to see 
if it can be simplified. But I will note, again, it's been like this for 
a very long time.


>
> Apologies; it took me a while to realize that the -nn references are fine while the (otherwise identical) generic ones are not.
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email