On 07/01/2021 18:33, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
With regard to "your turn to make a proposal"...
I started with a suggestion. I would not call it a proposal because to
act on it would require more knowledge of what git can and can't do than
I possess. I presume from the various people ignoring that suggestion,
that there are serious difficulties in producing understandable emails
from git.
Maybe some other folks have ideas worth exploring?
That the tool has little to do with it. If someone is incompetent with
a mattock, then likely they will be incompetent with a spade or a
shovel. If they lack the methodology, the discipline, the approach,
then the choice of tool is likely to be of little import, especially, as
has been pointed out here, the tools were designed for other arenas of
work, such as code.
I see 2020 as a time when less got done, when the work of the IETF
slowed down such that I had to make detailed notes so that when the
issues came up again - much later - I could see what I said and why and
carry on the discussion - I even write things down on paper!
Examples:
- a WG LC that was called six months ago, has generated some discussion
but has not been brought to a conclusion
- a RYO version of the RFC8174 boilerplate that was put right after a
comment but two versions of the I-D later, had reverted to the RYO
version; the WG has done this with other textual changes, too
- a WG that produces new versions of its I-Ds just before the IETF
meeting cutoff, does not respond on the mailing list to comments and
then produces new versions of its I-Ds just before the next meeting
cutoff (anyone recall a jest about monks discussing porridge?)
- a WG which comes back, a week or two after a comment, with the
response that the design team (ie a group of authors and their
colleagues, nothing formal) have discussed this and have decided xxx -
with, apart from the author posting to the list, no indication who else
is involved in this decision
- an I-D in the RFC Editor Queue for 835 days, held on a Normative
Reference for which the I-D has made no progress for months and seems
likely to stay that way; roll on 2022
etc., etc.
I would characterise these as there are managerial solutions to
technical problems but no technical solutions to managerial problems ie
a new tool or toolset will not improve things.
Tom Petch
Yours,
Joel
On 1/7/2021 1:21 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
Sorry, a once a week summary, no matter how good, does not let
someone
engage in the conversation. Also, responding to emails from such a
summary in a fashion that is understandable is quite difficult.
Your also comment brings to mind a question I asked earlier: did you
ever subscribe to the RISKS or other digests? Ever reply to a posting
there?
Have you followed any GitHub repo's, and seen the email that comes
when someone comments on an issue or pull request? Did you know you
can click on "watch"?
https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/managing-subscriptions-and-notifications-on-github/configuring-notifications
So no, I do not consider that a useful middle ground.
Your turn to make a proposal.
.
