--On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 14:55 -0900 Melinda Shore
<melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I don't know too many people who aren't currently using
> Github for various projects.
--On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 11:43 +0100 Randy Bush
<randy@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> i use git, svn, slac, ... everything but paper and pencil.
> and you and your friends are welcome to use whatever works for
> you.
> my issue is that the discussion, tracking of issues, ... must
> remain on the mailing lists until we leave the mailing lists
> behind for a better world. imiho, git isn't it.
I don't have nearly Randy's breadth of experience and do use
paper and pencil (but obviously not for community tracking). As
those who have worked with me on documents know, I also use a
lot of intermediate versions of drafts (intermediate between
posted ones) that contain a lot of notes to myself that tend to
be cryptic and/or sharp. Being forced to make those suitable
for general consumption or "it never goes away" archival use
would considerably slow down my work.
More important, I've found github, various versions of svn,
etc., far more suitable for code development and repositories
than for developing, writing, and tracking documents. I've
found github tracking and development of complex documents in at
least one non-IETF context sufficiently frustrating that I'm
getting close to dropping out of a reviewer/ contributor role
there. That may be just because I'm showing my age, but I think
there are real differences in requirements, differences that may
or may not be related to Randy's comment quoted above.
So, again, I think people should do what works for them and
helps get the work done. However, tracking and discussion
requirements should not change and we should stay focused on
submission formats and tracking/approval mechanisms, sticking
with things that have proven to work for the IETF until we have
something clearly better, and not the tools used to produce
things.
john