Subject: [COSE] Cose repository contributors guide

From: Justin Richer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:01:46 -0400

I was just pointed at a feature on GitHub that I didn’t know was there, and I’ve turned it on for cose-wg/cose-issues. This feature will display a link to the contribution guide (which currently contains the IETF Note Well) any time someone goes to create a new issue or pull request on the repository. 

 — Justin (your cose chair)

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 13:39:00 +0200

Hi Justin,

I have two questions:

1) Do you expect us to review the IETF draft version or to rather read
the Github version? (I don't care but I just want to know.)

2) Do you expect us to post review comments on the list, to create
issues in the IETF issue tracker (as we did, for example, in DICE or
JOSE) or to create them in Github?

Ciao
Hannes

On 09/02/2015 09:01 PM, Justin Richer wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> COSE mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
>

---

From: Justin Richer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 08:05:46 -0400

Hannes, great questions. Answers inline.

> the Github version? (I don't care but I just want to know.)

We're still working this out in detail, but it might help to think of 
the IETF draft as the "release" version and the GitHub draft as the 
"devel" version. The real reviews ought to go against the IETF drafts, 
but if you want to track the absolute latest changes, you'll find them 
in the GitHub version. This is useful for tracking the progress of a 
specific change in between drafts. We're working with Jim to figure out 
what a reasonable publication schedule / threshold looks like for this 
group.

> 2) Do you expect us to post review comments on the list,

Yes, that's fine, and good for discussion on things that don't have a 
clear answer or remediation. Discussion on the list is still canonical 
in the IETF.

> to create
> JOSE)
No, we will not be using the IETF tracker.

> or to create them in Github?

This is also fine and the preferred method for specific, actionable issues.

As always, if you can, providing proposed text to the editor is very 
helpful.

  -- Justin

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 14:18:39 +0200

Hi Justin,

thanks for the clarifications. That was helpful.

I would love to propose text but at the same time I want to avoid
wasting my time writing contributions that subsequently get trashed. I
am sure you understand that.

As you may have noticed, there are some strong views about fairly minor
items.

Ciao
Hannes

On 09/05/2015 02:05 PM, Justin Richer wrote:
>>> I was just pointed at a feature on GitHub that I didn’t know was
>>> there, and I’ve turned it on for cose-wg/cose-issues. This feature
>>> will display a link to the contribution guide (which currently
>>> contains the IETF Note Well) any time someone goes to create a new
>>> issue or pull request on the repository.
>>>

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 14:22:43 +0200

Btw, as chairs you will have to figure out how to call consensus on
certain items.

Very few people comment and among those who comment the positions are
typically 50:50. Just look at the CDDL discussion. Carsten and Jim like
CDDL. I dislike it and Phil also considered it unnecessary.

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2015 14:24:55 +0200

Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> the positions are
> typically 50:50.

In the IETF, these numbers are not usually the relevant part of the
consensus decision.

Grüße, Carsten

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 14:40:09 +0200

I trust Justin and Kepeng to make wise decisions.

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2015 14:48:55 +0200

> I trust Justin and Kepeng to make wise decisions.

Me too!  That's what we have WG chairs for.

Grüße, Carsten

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 15:00:51 +0200

;-) Great to hear that we are in agreement!

---

From: Justin Richer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 09:02:24 -0400

Thanks for the votes of confidence, we'll certainly do our best.

  -- Justin