Hi Bob, All the way down... On 1/28/16 6:02 PM, Bob Hinden wrote: > Eliot, > >> On Jan 28, 2016, at 4:55 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Jari, >> >> I have no conceptual problem with github being used for draft >> development or being integrated in our tools process for state changes, >> or archiving of discussions, but I would maintain strong objections to >> any approach that would lead to bifurcation of discussion on a topic. >> That is- the technology and our relationships with those providing the >> service should be conducive to a single integrated conversation on a topic. > To say this another way, using github (or other collaboration tools) is great for authors or a design team to work together to develop an Internet draft. I do this myself. I think the dividing line is that drafts should continue to be submitted via the datatracker as they are now and working groups be using the datatracker to do their work. I would be very concerned if working groups started to do their work outside of the datatracker. > Yes, and. Discussion of technical issues should remain normatively within a single platform. If we want that to be github, okay. But today it's email. Doing both would at first glance sound like reaching out to people who prefer different modes of communications, but at the end of the day proves quite difficult for those who are actually trying to keep track of multiple threads in a conversation. Also, any platform should be able to support our processes, particular those that help us address abuse. Eliot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature