Re: An IETF repository for working code in our protocols?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 20 August 2020 20:16 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D62AB3A13EF for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:16:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 txDNKQB3x8ko for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:16:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9AAD3A13EE for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:16:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3F0389F3; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 15:55:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id a9uYuFkEobPN; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 15:55:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3159389F2; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 15:55:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 966394BA; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:16:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com>
cc: wgchairs@ietf.org
Subject: Re: An IETF repository for working code in our protocols?
In-Reply-To: <CAMMTW_+hsOtL08jf087FbPiNjuy+Jx55iCxF4PxGSi8h=xSMGQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMMTW_+Di=ZBJFLNPaVK6f3w3Yq-V-qau8G_rfGt96SX_aYAAA@mail.gmail.com> <21487.1597887258@localhost> <CAMMTW_+hsOtL08jf087FbPiNjuy+Jx55iCxF4PxGSi8h=xSMGQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:16:41 -0400
Message-ID: <30258.1597954601@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/7ChPYC7kfElGpNe4V4LsRFoVoA0>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 20:16:47 -0000

Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com> wrote:
    > In the days when code lived at ftp.biguniversity.edu, the Internet had
    > equivalent tools to find it.  Remember gopher(1), and archie(1), and
    > veronica(1).  They were the github of their days.

No, I was there. They sucked for finding out where the latest patches
for the foobar project is.  You couldn't submit patches or bug reports or
anything to those FTP servers.  The code got unknowingly forked multiple times.

    > That said, I don't think github is a panacea.  I have established

Of course not.  But it's way better than before.
github leaves more unwanted things around, I agree.

    >> If the code gets orphaned, I think that either says something about the
    >> relevance of the standard, or perhaps more charitably, about the quality of
    >> the implementation.   or maybe the license was just wrong.
    >>

    > I think that is a value judgment that I would rather not participate in.
    > Clearly not every RFC that we produce becomes a rousing success.  For the
    > subset that do, why not provide more support?

I'm not really trying to make a value judgement: just observation.
I'm trying to say: if there is a community active around X, then X won't
appear orphaned.  If there is no community around X... then maybe people
voted with their wallets (mindshare) already.
For instance, can you find the latest patch set for Pathalias? (why would you care?)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-