Re: request for feedback: change to the ID boilerplate

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Spencer Dawkins wrote:
...
I'm not the guy who has to keep syncing the tools with boilerplate changes, so I'm not sure how much of a vote I should get, but my vote would be that taking up that much of the first page of every draft with information that is wrong, but that nobody even cares about enough to notice that it's wrong, actually is broken.

I would support accepting the old format until there's a GOOD reason to revise the toolset anyway, but that's a different question.

Thanks for all you do in support of the community. I used your tools to produce a draft revision yesterday, so I definitely appreciate you!
...

Thanks.

So, trying to rephrase:

1) Try to bundle all upcoming changes into a single one (headers & boilerplates, TLP changes, whatnot)

2) Attach a well-defined cut-over date to this change.

3) The changes should be well-defined for Internet Drafts and RFCs. As far as I can tell, that requires coordination between many parties, including IESG and RFC-Editor. Do not execute a change until all parties have agreed.

BR, Julian
_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]