On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 7:48 AM Robert Sparks <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 11/1/25 6:26 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Thanks. I missed the errata notation. > > With that said, that was just an example that came to hand readily, so it > would still be helpful to know if there is some resource we can refer to > of things that are known to be nonfunctional, unless you're saying that > those two items + the GitHub issues are exhaustive. > > No it is not intended to be exhaustive, and there is not a place right now > to point to that is. If you see something missing open an issue. > OK. I just filed an initial tranche of 10 issues at: https://github.com/ietf-tools/red-beta/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20author%3Aekr -Ekr > There is a bit more at the source repo itself ( > https://github.org/ietf-tools/red), but we want to collect feedback on > this week's snapshot at https://github.org/ietf-tools/red-beta. > > The point of this demo is for Alexis and the RPC to get early feedback on > what's implemented so far - this was part of the motivation for initially > setting this up as a demonstration at the desk only. We've made it more > widely available at your suggestion, but the level of self-serve > introspection of the project you are looking for is not something we have > right now. We are showing the implementation in an earlier state than > commercial organizations might as part of the IETF's focus on transparency. > > RjS > > > > -Ekr > > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 3:17 PM Alexis Rossi <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi Ekr, >> >> There are some things not functioning yet, as well as some wonky data, in >> this case per Robert's email: >> "This demo does not cover views of the queue or the errata system. Those will >> be coming in the next several weeks." >> >> Thanks, >> Alexis >> >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2025, 5:56 PM Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Robert, >>> >>> Thanks for putting this together. I took an initial look and I've found >>> some >>> issues and wanted to get a sense of how best to engage. In particular, >>> when I click on the GitHub link to report issues [0] I see that there >>> are only >>> three open issues, but there are other things missing that it seems the >>> team >>> knows about. For instance this appears on the errata page: >>> >>> [image: image.png] >>> >>> There are also other things that don't seem to work but are not flagged >>> with >>> TODOs (e.g., missing errata on RFCs which have errata). Is there some >>> project plan or issues list etc. that we can refer to to see what is >>> supposed to >>> work and what is known not to? >>> >>> -Ekr >>> >>> [0] https://github.com/ietf-tools/red-beta/issues >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 1:34 PM Robert Sparks <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In addition to the in-person demos at the RFC Editor and Tools Team >>>> desks this week, a snapshot of the work in progress for the new RFC >>>> Editor website is available for browsing at >>>> https://www-beta.rfc-editor.org. >>>> >>>> If you have feedback, please send it to [email protected], open >>>> an >>>> issue at https://github.com/ietf-tools/red-beta/issues or come talk to >>>> us at the desks. >>>> >>>> A couple of things to keep in mind while looking through this snapshot: >>>> >>>> It is taking data from a development instance of the datatracker, which >>>> is serving as a temporary stand-in for the data that will come from the >>>> new RPC database under development. That instance's data is not being >>>> updated during the week, so any RFCs published during the week will not >>>> appear there. >>>> >>>> The datatracker has slightly different author information than the >>>> authoritative RPC database, so you will see differences with author >>>> names. This will be resolved - the datatracker and the RPC database >>>> will >>>> have the same data about authors - before this new website goes into >>>> production. >>>> >>>> This demo does not cover views of the queue or the errata system. Those >>>> will be coming in the next several weeks. >>>> >>>> You will need to be logged to the datatracker to view the demo site. >>>> The >>>> production website will not have this requirement. >>>> >>>> The demo will be taken down at the end of IETF 124. Future versions of >>>> it are likely before we reach the production deployment, which is >>>> expected before IETF 125. >>>> >>>> RjS >>>> >>>> On 10/15/25 1:22 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: >>>> > Please come by the RFC Editor and Tools Team desks during IETF 124. >>>> We >>>> > will have a preview of the rfc-editor.org website that is under >>>> > development available for demonstration. >>>> > >>>> > Today's blog post at >>>> > https://www.ietf.org/blog/rfc-editor-website-update/ has more about >>>> > the upcoming website. >>>> > >>>> > RjS >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected] >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>> >>> ----------------------------------------------- >>> Tools-discuss mailing list -- [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/ >> >> > ----------------------------------------------- > Tools-discuss mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to > [email protected]https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/ > >
_______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
