Re: [Tools-implementation] Different topic: pointing to drafts from the datatracker

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

> On Sep 16, 2020, at 8:31 AM, Henrik Levkowetz <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Signed PGP part
> Hi Robert,
> 
> On 2020-09-15 20:15, Robert Sparks wrote:
>> You've seen the thread with Carsten, Michael, and others about how the
>> advent of v3 html has put pressure on what URLs for a draft that people
>> might reference (from a paper).
>> 
>> I think there are many things we might do with the feedback in that
>> thread. One is fairly quick and easy - I think we have places where the
>> datatracker points to www.ietf.org/id/ for drafts. I propose we change
>> all of those to point to www.ietf.org/archive/id instead.
> 
> Sounds reasonable, although I think the only places we currently don't
> point at /archive/id/ is in the draft announcement emails.  If we change
> those, too, then maybe it's time to ask the IESG to simply ditch the
> separate active drafts directory altogether.
> 
> Having seen how things worked 20 years ago, and how things have evolved,
> the active-drafts repository made a lot of sense at a time when there
> was no datatracker, no tools site, and the only way to get drafts was to
> pull them (via http* or ftp) from the active drafts repository.  But
> today, the utility of that in parallel with /archive/id/ is so marginal,
> and the extra bother sufficiently large, that I think it could be time to
> move to not having separate active drafts and archived drafts directories.

I'm not sure that I totally agree.  I like to rsync the current drafts.  I do not want all of them on my laptop.

Russ