On 25/2/21 19:25, Salz, Rich wrote:
Using the same toolchain, per se, doesn't seem like a rationale
Reducing a barrier to contribute is worthwhile.
When you're changing the way of contributing, you're not universally
"reducing the barrier". -- certainly not for somebody that does't do git.
Just as some are advocating being able to submit a draft in any format they have on-hand.
Ok, so this seems to imply that part of the thing is that subcribing to
the mailing-lists is seen as part of the problem.
No. Participating in a high-volume list with no practical ability to filter things out to just the one section of a draft, for example.
Point taken. So... mailing list are seen as a problematic mechanism to
carry our work?
[...]
F is already making copies of those repositories mentioned in the
datatracker.
Certainly this kind of think may make the life of some easier, and the
life of others more painful. But there *is* an implied tradeoff here.
It's not a win-win thing.
In my experience, very few things are win-win.
Indeed. That's why claiming that the barriers are lowered is a dificult
claim.
It would be nice if all potential IETF participants were born in the same era and used to the same tools, I suppose. But it would also be very boring.
It's probably also boring that we all use IP....
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
