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

[Tero Kivinen <[e-mail]>]

Bob Hinden writes:
> Looks good to me.  I like the way the end date of the last call was
> changed.

On the other hand it should automatically update the end date if it is
changed in the first field. Now it requires you to manually edit the
subject and body for correct date if you change date.

And both subject and body MUST have date, as otherwise you are not
able to submit the form. And there is no way to start WG last call
without sending email, i.e., if you want to start WGLC and want to
send email manually there is no option for opt-out.

Also when you do switch adoption and click that you want to adopt it
to get through first form it will set the docuemnt to Candidate for WG
Adoption, but does not yet start WG adoption call.

Perhaps the "Issue IETF WG Call for Adoption" button on "Manage
adoption" page should just say "Start adoption process", as this
button just sets the document to Candidate for adoption state.

The WG adoption is set and email send only after the 2nd form so that
allows you to manually bypass the email if needed. On the other hand
if you manually set the document to "Candidate for WG adoption" (or
has gone through the first form), I could not find a way to get back
to the 2nd form which would allow sending email.

We have quite often marked documents as Candidate for WG adoption when
they are published, then discuss them in the group and then start for
adoption call, but in that case I can't use the new email feature... 

So perhaps if document is in the "Candidate for WG adoption" state,
then clicking "Manage adoption" should still bring up the "Manage
adoption", and the button should then say "Continue adoption process". 


> 
> One suggestions, instead of just a link the datatracker, how about just some
> direct links to the document.  For example (copied from ID announcement
> emails):
> 
>     The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-snac-simple/
>    
>     There is also an HTML version available at:
>     https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-snac-simple-07.html
>    
>     A diff from the previous version is available at:
>     https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-snac-simple-07
> 
> Bob
> 
>     On Oct 15, 2025, at 3:03 PM, Robert Sparks <[e-mail]> wrote:
>    
>     Based on the feedback so far I've modified the workflow to make it more
>     clear that the issue wg lc action is different from the earlier "set this
>     state directly" action.
>    
>     I've also added preview/edit of the call for adoption message to the
>     branch, which involved adding interstitial views in two workflows ("manage
>     adoption", and "set stream state"). These interstitial views should only
>     appear if you are a chair of some IETF WG that might adopt a document,
>     otherwise, the views should behave the way they have to date.
>    
>     I have _not_ yet changed the text either of the messages default to. When
>     the discussion of that settles to a point the IESG is happy, it can be
>     changed in a separate PR.
>    
>     Please return to https://dt-issuewglc.dev.ietf.org and exercise the
>     issue-wg-lc and issue-call-for-adoption workflows.
>    
>     I'm particularly interested in feedback from RG chairs (both those that
>     are also WG chairs, and those that are not chairs of WGs) to make sure the
>     changes haven't made the workflows harder/different from their
>     perspective.
>    
>     RjS
>    
>     On 9/26/25 11:11 AM, Robert Sparks 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

-- 
[e-mail]