Hi Alissa,
At 07:16 AM 12-03-2020, Alissa Cooper wrote:
Based on discussion with Alvaro on the IESG telechat today, I said I
would take out the RFC Editor note about BCP 25 tomorrow if no one
from the WG objects. This document will then get its own BCP number
when it is published.
I read RFC 4858. Paragraph 3.c states that "The Document Shepherd
then queries the ID Tracker to collect the remaining DISCUSS and
COMMENT items raised against the document. The Document Shepherd
analyzes these items and initializes contact with the ADs who have
placed them." I did not see that being done for
draft-ietf-git-using-github. Paragraph 2.b states that "If the
Responsible Area Director has identified issues with
a document that must be addressed before IESG Evaluation can
commence, he or she sends a full evaluation to the Document Shepherd
and SHOULD also enter the review into the ID Tracker." The authors
of draft-ietf-git-using-github did not respond to any of the Last
Call comments (excluding the reviews from the directorates).
The Last Call ended on March 3. There is some disagreement over
whether the document should be a "BCP". I assumed that it would be
resolved through discussion with what is sometimes referred to as the
"IETF Community". My reading of your message is that it is for the
working group to decide about that.
There was a GitHub disruption in 2018 which had an impact on IETF
work. As such, it is neither an unforeseen incident nor some
hypothetical scenario.
As for the changes after the closing of the Last Call, I see a bunch
of "pull" requests to the external web site. There isn't any
explanation on the Working Group mailing about the issues and how
they were addressed.
I would like to raise an objection on the handing of
draft-ietf-git-using-github.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
