IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tools-discuss] draft submitted source versions

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Mon, 25 November 2019 23:57 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
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 367FF120FF7 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:57:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=1.049, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 1lr_79eftlXG for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:57:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DBDF120124 for <Tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:57:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (unknown [194.42.227.53]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D41DA1F482; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:57:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id B6014134B; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:37:53 +0800 (+08)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
To: Tom Pusateri <pusateri=40bangj.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
cc: Tools-discuss@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <8811A5B6-AF57-458D-8F67-CEF314E2B107@bangj.com>
References: <20191122164625.6C831F406D4@rfc-editor.org> <8811A5B6-AF57-458D-8F67-CEF314E2B107@bangj.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Tom Pusateri <pusateri=40bangj.com@dmarc.ietf.org> message dated "Fri, 22 Nov 2019 13:39:51 -0500."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 08:37:53 +0100
Message-ID: <31178.1574667473@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/lk7zLBfJiRNxTDxf5T6J4kLAweI>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] draft submitted source versions
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: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:57:29 -0000

Tom Pusateri <pusateri=40bangj.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    > Is there anyway to tell if the TXT version was created from the
    > submitted XML or was uploaded separately?

    > If an XML version is submitted, is there any reason to allow DRAFT
    > AUTHORS to submit alternate versions still?

If the XML won't format because the references.* files are AWOL, then
allowing the author to upload the TXT version lets them get around that.

This happened to me last week.


--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email