Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- github_experiment_6 [2023/04/26 22:23] – [The plan] sginoza
+++ github_experiment_6 [2026/02/12 05:44] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-====== GitHub Experiment 6 - RFC TBD ======
+====== GitHub "Experiment 6" Design ======
+The following design was discussed at the [[114_github_workshop_followup|GitHub Workshop at IETF 114]] and followed for experiments held between IETF 114 and IETF 117. The design is based on the [[github_exp_9245|experiment with RFC 9245]].
+**Note:** Although the file format was initially limited to RFCXML, a markdown source file is now also acceptable.
 ===== The plan =====
@@ Line 17: / Line 21: @@
 The RPC will add open questions as issues.
-The RPC and author will work in this fork during AUTH48.
+The RPC and author will work in the RPC fork during AUTH48.
 The RPC will make formatting edits only after the author has approved copy edits.
@@ Line 24: / Line 28: @@
 ^Requestor  ^ I-D  ^ Pages ^ Experiment ^ Date Requested ^
 | [[rlb@ipv.sx|Richard Barnes]] | [[https://github.com/tlswg/tls-subcerts/blob/master/draft-ietf-tls-subcerts.md|draft-ietf-tls-subcerts-15]] | 17 | Markdown & GitHub | 4 Oct 2022 |
-|[[rjsparks@nostrum.com|Robert Sparks]] | [[https://github.com/rjsparks/draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons|draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons]] | 4 | XML & GitHub | 2 Nov 2022 |
+|[[rjsparks@nostrum.com|Robert Sparks]] | [[https://github.com/rjsparks/draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons|draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons]] | 4 | Markdown & GitHub | 2 Nov 2022 |
-|[[caw@heapingbits.net|Christopher Wood]] | [[https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-hash-to-curve/|draft-irtf-cfrg-hash-to-curve]] | 175 | XML & GitHub | |
+|[[caw@heapingbits.net|Christopher Wood]] | [[https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-hash-to-curve/|draft-irtf-cfrg-hash-to-curve]] | 175 | Markdown & GitHub | 20 Oct 2022 |
-|RFC Editor | [[https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-subdomains/|draft-ietf-acme-subdomains]] | 22 | n/a; authors declined to participate.  See comments below.| |
+|RFC Editor | [[https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-subdomains/|draft-ietf-acme-subdomains]] | 22 | n/a; authors declined to participate.| 7 April 2023 |
-<code>Comments related to draft-ietf-acme-subdomains:
-* From Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>:
-I am all for using GitHub for AUTH48, but we should do it properly,
-with all text changes being made by the RPC making pull requests
-against the document repo [1].
-[1] https://github.com/upros/acme-subdomains
-* From Owen Friel <ofriel@cisco.com>:
-I just got wind of the current RPC github process, where RPC creates
-a new repo that they control and makes their changes there, and then
-the document authors/editors (with their own repo where the original
-document lives) have to create PRs against the RPC repo to revert any
-changes that RPC make.
-This is a github anti-pattern, and I have never heard of anyone using
-github like this for any purpose anywhere. Why can the RPC not submit
-PRs against the document's original repo?
-If trialing github for AUTH48 means we have to follow that crazy process,
-then I am not in favor of that at all.
-* From Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>:
-I don't want a github process :-)
-I want a *GIT* process, that starts from our existing repos. I think that
-RPC should run it on their own gitlab.
-At the end of the day, if the authors are using github, they can take the git
-repo back from the RPC and merge it, or not.
-</code>