Thanks, Per, for considering and addressing my comments. Barry
On Thu, Apr 2, 2026 at 9:03 AM Per Andersson <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Barry, > > Thanks for the review! > > All your concerns should be addressed and cleared in the > latest revision. Please verify that they have been cleared. > > Details inlined below. > > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 9:47 PM Barry Leiba via Datatracker > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Document: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-filename > > Title: YANG module file name convention > > Reviewer: Barry Leiba > > Review result: Has Issues > > > > This is simple and useful; thanks for writing it up. I have some > comments > > about Section 2: > > > > If a revision has an associated YANG semantic version (ysv:version) > > then it MAY use the YANG semantic version instead of the revision > > date in the file name of a YANG file, where it takes the form: > > > > module-or-submodule-name [['@' revision-date]['#' ysv:version]] > > ( '.yang' / '.yin' ) > > > > E.g., [email protected] or > > acme-router-module#2.0.3.yang. > > > > The ABNF allows for both the revision date and the semantic version, > together > > (and only in that order), though the text implies that they’re mutually > > exclusive. > > > > If it’s intended that only one *or* the other be used, as “instead of” > implies > > you need to adjust the ABNF, for example by replacing > > [['@' revision-date]['#' ysv:version]] > > with > > [(‘@‘ revision-date) / (‘#’ ysv:version)] > > > > If it’s intended that both may be used together, you should probably > change > > “instead of” and also add an example with both. > > The intention is that they are mutually exclusive and the > ABNF was wrong and has been updated according to > your suggestion. Thanks! > > > > And if it’s intended that both may be used together and that they can be > in > > either order, the ABNF has to change to accommodate the ordering issue. > > > > In short, the YANG semantic version file name scheme is recommended > > in order to simplify for module consumers, i.e. to convey > > compatibility status at a glance without needing to read the module. > > This have been updated to reflect that both are allowed, but > should not be used simultaneously. > > Furthermore, if a revision has a ysv:version a file with the > YANG Semver MUST be created. A file with the revision-date > MAY also be created. > > > > An English nit here: you can’t just “simplify for someone”, as > “simplify" needs > > a direct object: you have to “simplify something for someone”. Often we > use a > > placeholder in informal writing, as “in order to simplify things for > module > > consumers,” but it might be better in a formal specification to rewrite > this to > > avoid the problem: > > > > NEW > > In short, the YANG semantic version file name scheme is recommended, > > as its use will convey compatibility status at a glance without the > > need to read the module. > > END > > Took your suggestion, thanks! > > > > The last two paragraphs in Section 2 seem at the same time repetitious > and > > contradictory of what came before. The last paragraph, in particular, > confuses > > me: earlier you say that you MAY use the semantic version and here you > say that > > you MUST use it, but then it appears that you can create two files (with > the > > same content?). I’m not clear on this bit. > > This has been clarified according to the above. > > > -- > Per >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
