Subject: Re: [sacm] Hackathon Planning for IETF 100

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 11:25:50 +0000

Ping :-)

I'll ping again in a week or two, so let's plan to start regular meetings
in late August or (at the latest) early September.

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:45 AM Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> All:
>
> After our successful hackathon efforts at IETF 99, we would like to plan
> for another, follow-on hackathon effort at IETF 100. The goal would be to
> merge the two related IETF 99 efforts (see
> https://github.com/sacmwg/vulnerability-scenario/tree/master/ietf_99_hackathon
> ).
>
> To this end, I think we should begin by establishing a regular meeting
> cadence, similar to what we did in preparation for IETF 99. This time,
> however, we could attempt one or two 30-minute meetings once per week.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Karen pointed out that we may have more significant logistical challenges
> with this hackathon, as Singapore may be a harder destination for folks to
> reach. We'll work through it, and the challenge may end up working in our
> favor.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Adam
>

---

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2017 16:50:51 +0000

All:

You may have noticed some notes about changes made to our vulnerability
scenario repository. I renamed the "ietf_99_hackathon" directory to
"ietf_hackathon" then tagged that repository state as "0.1". This
"pre-release" is intended to capture the repository state before we begin
updating it for IETF 100...

In support of the IETF 100 hackathon, I created a new project.

Finally, this note also serves as a gentle reminder that we should start
getting this planning and work under way.

If no one has any thoughts on whether two 30-minute sessions would be
better than one 1-hour session, on a weekly basis, by the end of the day on
Thursday, then I'll send out a Doodle polls for two 30-minute sessions on
Friday.

Kind regards,

Adam

On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 6:25 AM Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:45 AM Adam Montville <
> [email-masked]> wrote:
>
>> All:
>>