IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IETF Git and GitHub tutorial

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Tue, 15 October 2019 17:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@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 CC6691201C6 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 10:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 wI6C4dyG5GYi for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 10:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
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 CB6B91200F3 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 10:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (214-137-20-31.ftth.glasoperator.nl [31.20.137.214]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AB3C1F455; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 17:20:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id D5C96C97; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 19:21:06 +0200 (CEST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
cc: IETF WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: IETF Git and GitHub tutorial
In-reply-to: <CAHw9_iJ7rd164GyPe4ebfC-+3vNcA7j+0gfNdx+-7q+kqcQJXA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3b3a2e43-3a37-44d8-9967-920d2f977e42@www.fastmail.com> <CADZyTk=7fN+i7H1AX+T7fW3OOQGUAd7z0mtGAeUnpr2O5vZsKA@mail.gmail.com> <CADZyTkkku5y8a1HURp6uQ447eq_dn5wzhwPxhqrpvg1U4dHctQ@mail.gmail.com> <9338.1570802815@dooku.sandelman.ca> <4FDDF67C-0E50-43C1-A067-DB4FBD5F453B@akamai.com> <85ED12CD-E3EA-4FE7-830D-6785462D0B97@encrypted.net> <CAHw9_i+3ibSa465UMXr7frBMQE3kDxGx2q_UNWE11wNoqRvLwg@mail.gmail.com> <104A1C16-97F1-4D1F-9559-A88932332268@encrypted.net> <15793.1570958360@dooku.sandelman.ca> <CAHw9_iJ7rd164GyPe4ebfC-+3vNcA7j+0gfNdx+-7q+kqcQJXA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> message dated "Sun, 13 Oct 2019 12:37:43 +0200."
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: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 19:21:06 +0200
Message-ID: <28127.1571160066@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/9LAXdCmQHL-N5FMVkbr0eZlrqvs>
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: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 17:20:19 -0000

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
    >> So, I care less about making it easy for reviewers to be able make
    >> pull-requests.  I significantly prefer that non-design-team members bring
    >> their issues to the mailing list, and that they "send text" that way.

    > As a draft author, I deeply love pull requests — sure, substantive text
    > should go through discussions, but after 67 instances of:
    > O: “In other words it is better...”
    > P: “In other words, it is better...”
    > C: Nit - you are missing a comma.

Yes, I totally agree with you here.
Such editorial nit pull requests can be done in many ways, and they simply
don't need WG attention at all.  Use the technology here.  The design team
ultimately decides when/if/how to process things.

While I applaud QUIC's ability to live in github issues (and the CELLAR WG
does almost as well), I think that for a large number of WGs, the
non-design-team members are simply not git-clueful enough (on average).

The lack of a complete web-based workflow (the missing git rebase step) means
it's just better not to do that.

-- 
]               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