I do not understand why tools need to be limited by the least common denominator for the IETF as a whole, or limited to 1982 technology. Why is it such a burden to ask people to learn a new tool once every 3 decades or so? Clearly, git (along with related tooling, such as kramdown) is of great value to many because they've spread across the IETF at (for this group) an incredibly rapid pace.
IMO, a better response to the challenges posed by useful new tooling is to make it more accessible, not to prohibit it.
Kyle
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:43 AM Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 1/4/21 12:40 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
I have seen groups trying to use git and I really wish they would stop. Using git to run a WG provides a small amount of tool support for issues tracking which is useful. But the tool is designed to do a very different job and has its own bizarre vocabulary. Telling people to enter comments as 'Pull Requests' causes most people's mental gears to grind. The result is WGs whose activities are unhappily split between a Web site and a mailing list with no cohesion between the two.+1
