[Tools-discuss] Re: [rfc-i] Re: Demo of the Rfc-Editor website at IETF 124

[Robert Sparks <[e-mail]>]

On 11/1/25 6:26 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Thanks. I missed the errata notation.
>
> With that said, that was just an example that came to hand readily, so it
> would still be helpful to know if there is some resource we can refer to
> of things that are known to be nonfunctional, unless you're saying that
> those two items + the GitHub issues are exhaustive.

No it is not intended to be exhaustive, and there is not a place right 
now to point to that is. If you see something missing open an issue.

There is a bit more at the source repo itself 
(https://github.org/ietf-tools/red) but we want to collect feedback on 
this week's snapshot at https://github.org/ietf-tools/red-beta.

The point of this demo is for Alexis and the RPC to get early feedback 
on what's implemented so far - this was part of the motivation for 
initially setting this up as a demonstration at the desk only. We've 
made it more widely available at your suggestion, but the level of 
self-serve introspection of the project you are looking for is not 
something we have right now. We are showing the implementation in an 
earlier state than commercial organizations might as part of the IETF's 
focus on transparency.

RjS


>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 3:17 PM Alexis Rossi 
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>     Hi Ekr,
>
>     There are some things not functioning yet, as well as some wonky
>     data, in this case per Robert's email:
>     "This demo does not cover views of the queue or the errata system.
>     Those will be coming in the next several weeks."
>
>     Thanks,
>      Alexis
>
>     On Sat, Nov 1, 2025, 5:56 PM Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>         Robert,
>
>         Thanks for putting this together. I took an initial look and
>         I've found some
>         issues and wanted to get a sense of how best to engage. In
>         particular,
>         when I click on the GitHub link to report issues [0] I see
>         that there are only
>         three open issues, but there are other things missing that it
>         seems the team
>         knows about. For instance this appears on the errata page:
>
>         image.png
>
>         There are also other things that don't seem to work but are
>         not flagged with
>         TODOs (e.g., missing errata on RFCs which have errata). Is
>         there some
>         project plan or issues list etc. that we can refer to to see
>         what is supposed to
>         work and what is known not to?
>
>         -Ekr
>
>         [0] https://github.com/ietf-tools/red-beta/issues
>
>         On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 1:34 PM Robert Sparks
>         <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>             In addition to the in-person demos at the RFC Editor and
>             Tools Team
>             desks this week, a snapshot of the work in progress for
>             the new RFC
>             Editor website is available for browsing at
>             https://www-beta.rfc-editor.org.
>
>             If you have feedback, please send it to
>             [e-mail], open an
>             issue at https://github.com/ietf-tools/red-beta/issues or
>             come talk to
>             us at the desks.
>
>             A couple of things to keep in mind while looking through
>             this snapshot:
>
>             It is taking data from a development instance of the
>             datatracker, which
>             is serving as a temporary stand-in for the data that will
>             come from the
>             new RPC database under development. That instance's data
>             is not being
>             updated during the week, so any RFCs published during the
>             week will not
>             appear there.
>
>             The datatracker has slightly different author information
>             than the
>             authoritative RPC database, so you will see differences
>             with author
>             names. This will be resolved - the datatracker and the RPC
>             database will
>             have the same data about authors - before this new website
>             goes into
>             production.
>
>             This demo does not cover views of the queue or the errata
>             system. Those
>             will be coming in the next several weeks.
>
>             You will need to be logged to the datatracker to view the
>             demo site. The
>             production website will not have this requirement.
>
>             The demo will be taken down at the end of IETF 124. Future
>             versions of
>             it are likely before we reach the production deployment,
>             which is
>             expected before IETF 125.
>
>             RjS
>
>             On 10/15/25 1:22 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
>             > Please come by the RFC Editor and Tools Team desks
>             during IETF 124. We
>             > will have a preview of the rfc-editor.org
>             <http://rfc-editor.org> website that is under
>             > development available for demonstration.
>             >
>             > Today's blog post at
>             > https://www.ietf.org/blog/rfc-editor-website-update/ has
>             more about
>             > the upcoming website.
>             >
>             > RjS
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             rfc-interest mailing list -- [e-mail]
>             To unsubscribe send an email to
>             [e-mail]
>
>         -----------------------------------------------
>         Tools-discuss mailing list -- [e-mail]
>         To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>         https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Tools-discuss mailing list [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email [e-mail]
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/