On 25/2/21 14:39, Andrew Campling wrote:
[...]
FWIW, we have already started to work on a revision of the draft
(working copy at:
https://github.com/fgont/diversity/blob/main/draft-gont-diversity-analysis-01.txt),
[....]
> This made me smile as GitHub is itself an excellent example of a
tool being a barrier to entry for new participants.
Note: I'm using github just as a file repository. I don't request or
expect people to create an account, or send pull requests. And where
certainly *not* using github as an issue tracker.
> I've been using word processors since the early '80s (WordStar back in
> the day), don't understand why anyone would opt to use a different
> tool to write a document. I know that this point of view will not be
> accepted by many current IETF participants but it seems particularly
> perverse to use a software development tool to write documents when
> there are many widely available options that are far better suited to
> the task (many of which support collaborative writing).
FWIW, we're editing the xml source with simple text editors (Linux gedit
in my case), and then processing it with the xml2rfc tool.
So far, we're bouncing the text among co-authors, changes are applied,
and then git is essentially used as a simple e.g. ftp alternative --
that's it.
And, since you've raised it: I personally agree that requiring the use
of git/github does represent yet another barrier.
If the intent is to broaden participation by people from different
disciplines then I'd urge the use of more commonly used tools
wherever possible.
I might as well upload the document via ftp/sftp, and subsequently
provide an URL. git/gihub was simply easier.
But in no way we require or even expect the reader to use git/github.
(I do understand that other folks or wgs do... but that's not the case
for this document).
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
