Re: Possible modification to issuing Working Group Last Calls from the datatracker

[Robert Sparks <[e-mail]>]

On 9/26/25 3:57 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
> Robert,
>
> This is a good improvement.
>
> A few suggestions:
>
> The change to WG State, like "Issue WG Last call" is at the top.  It’s easy to not fill in the expected weeks in state.   The next step appears to have a 2 week default.  Especially since it says "You may not set the 'In WG Last Call' state using this form - Use the button above or the document's main page to request a WG LC.”   Maybe there is a better way to organize this.

Suggestions welcome.

The buttons are up top because they are not part of the form below that 
asks for expected weeks in state - whatever you put there if you hit the 
top buttons will not be used.

Instead, those buttons take you to views that do much more than that 
"change state" form did.

>
> The text in the email "Objections should be motivated and suggestions to resolve them are highly appreciated.”   That doesn’t read well.  Not sure what “motivated” means.
Take that up with the IESG - it's text they specified. See 
https://github.com/ietf-tools/datatracker/issues/9142
>    
>
> It would be nice if the end of the email included the names of the chairs.
Ack.
>
> Lastly, I am curious why the IPR paragrph is needed here.   It is correct, but not sure it is need in a w.g. last call.
Again, that's a question for the IESG.
>   
>
> Thanks
> Bob
>
>
>
>> On Sep 26, 2025, at 9:11 AM, Robert Sparks <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> The recent change to the datatracker to send email as a side effect of putting a document in working group last call (or call for adoption issued) surprised several chairs, and requests have been made to make it obvious that mail is about to be sent, and allow that mail to be edited before sending. See https://github.com/ietf-tools/datatracker/issues/9439
>>
>> I have a proposal for a change to the workflow to allow this. It's currently running at:
>>
>> https://dt-issuewglc.dev.ietf.org
>>
>> That's a development instance - remember that your passwords there are all literally "password", and that anything you do there won't _actually_ send any email or make any change at all to the production datatracker database.
>>
>> Please experiment with the workflow for issuing wglc for documents in your WGs - start with the edit button next to stream state - the rest is hopefully self explanatory.
>>
>> If this approach resonates well, I'll do the same thing to issuing call for adoption.
>>
>> (The proposed code changes are at https://github.com/ietf-tools/datatracker/pull/9616)
>>
>> RjS
>>
>>