Hi all,
On 9/18/25 7:56 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
The RPC has already said that the existing e-mail based flow will remain.
[JM] Yes, the RPC will continue to support the current email-based process.
Thanks!
Jean
-Ekr
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 3:40 AM Andrew G. Malis <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
In addition to Brian's questions, this entire conversation seems to
assume a level of familiarity/comfort with git that not all authors
may have. Will authors be able to continue to use the current
procedures as well if they prefer?
Cheers,
Andy
On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 11:02 PM Brian E Carpenter
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
> Just to be clear, if the authors want to make unsolicited
changes beyond what the RPC changed, they should be generating
their own PRs, not making those changes to the RPC's PR.
>
And if the changes are not purely editorial, they must be
reported to the WG, as long as we're talking about IETF
Consensus documents. So that changes the game.
BTW I'm not sure the procedure that Richard outlined is
complete. There's an important step in the current procedure
that he didn't list:
2a. Script sends RPC's specfic questions to authors in a second
email
and step 3 should read:
3. Authors respond to email including answering those specific
questions
So how are those questions handled via Github? And how does the
RPC nag authors that don't reply?
Brian
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
