Hi Fernando,
On 5/11/20 21:57, Salz, Rich wrote: Jay's note was a little incorrect.
There is a tools-team which is described on https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/tools/ and has an open email list called tools-discuss at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss This group works on things like code sprints, data tracker, IETF issues for the RPC, and so on. They've also discussed hosting, containers, Jabber/IM experiments, and so on.
There is another group, recently chartered, called the tools architecture and strategy team. That charter is to look at longer-range issues and is purposefully a closed-membership group, although the archives are public.
How are/were members selected?
I’ve included below the initial message I sent to Henrik, Robert, and Russ about the team when I was thinking about forming it. As you can see, the idea of this team was to get some new people together with people with extensive IETF tools experience and split the load of considering some of the bigger picture strategic and architectural aspects from the day-to-day maintenance, development, and oversight of the tools. I had good follow-up on this email with Robert where we discussed it on several calls. I never heard anything about it from Henrik, and the team was formed about three weeks after I sent this email and after the full tools team, IESG, and IAB were looped in.
Best, Alissa
--------
Subject: IETF tools architecture and strategy team
Date: January 16, 2020 at 4:44:33 PM EST
Hi all,
I've put together a description for a new team in the General area, the tools architecture and strategy team (see attached). Based on observations of the tools team over the last few years and discussions with Jay, I think there is a need to dedicate more and separate resources from the community to thinking about the overall architecture of the IETF tools and support for them. The tools suite has grown organically and serves many needs (thanks to you and our dedicated volunteers!), but it would be nice to have more coherence of strategy and architecture across the whole suite.
The development of this should not distract from the day-to-day work that you and the contracted developers put in, nor from the operational oversight that the tools team provides. At the same time, my hope is that having the kinds of guidance outlined in the team description will reduce friction in the tools development process over time and make the whole operation run more smoothly. If there are important topics that you think are missing from the initial topics list, please let me know.
I’ll be reaching out to the people listed in the document to gauge their interest in participating and later informing the community, but I wanted you to be aware of this from the outset while it’s still in development. There are a couple of people listed there who are not IETF participants but who have a lot of experience with large-scale software deployments and management, to provide some external perspective. Robert, I’ve listed you as tools team liaison in the hope that you can serve as a bridge between the teams, and the team description has some words about having you establish plans and workflows. Let me know what you think.
Let me know if you have questions, comments, or concerns. I would also be happy to jump on a call if you want to discuss further.
Best,
Alissa
|
