Subject: [tap] Next steps

From: Gaurav Vaidya <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:37:37 +0800

Hi,

I've put up boilerplates for both the pages we created on the  
TestAnything.org Wiki yesterday:
- http://testanything.org/wiki/index.php/IETF_WG_Proposed_Charter is  
a proposed charter, in the form prescribed by RFC 2418.
- http://testanything.org/wiki/index.php/TAP_at_IETF:_Draft_Standard  
is the draft standard, with some of the boilerplate for an Internet- 
Draft.

What's our next step with this? Should we try and get the charter  
done by the next IETF meeting next month? Should we focus on the  
Internet-Draft so we have something to show other people and drum up  
excitement about this? It'd be great if someone who knows more about  
where exactly we are with this process, and about IETF procedures in  
general, could let us know about this :-).

Working on the drafts on the Wiki itself might be the easiest way to  
coordinate the writing. Agreement/disagreement?

Barring a discussion, I'm going to start moving content from the two  
TAP specifications we have (http://search.cpan.org/~petdance/TAP-1.00/ 
TAP.pm and http://podwiki.hexten.net/podwiki.pl?page=TAP13) into the  
draft standard on the Wiki. That way, when we know which way we're  
headed, we'll have started already :-).

cheers,
Gaurav
_______________________________________________
tap mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap

---

From: Andy Armstrong <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 17:41:00 +0100

> coordinate the writing. Agreement/disagreement?

+1 to that.

> TAP specifications we have (http://search.cpan.org/~petdance/TAP-1.00/TAP.pm 
>  and http://podwiki.hexten.net/podwiki.pl?page=TAP13) into the draft  
> standard on the Wiki. That way, when we know which way we're headed,  
> we'll have started already :-).

Thanks Gaurav - that was the next thing I planned to do but I'm short  
on time at the moment.

-- 
Andy Armstrong, Hexten

---

From: Andy Armstrong <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 17:45:04 +0100

> we'll have started already :-).

"If it's easier to work on the draft in this Wiki, I'll volunteer to  
convert it into XML."

Sounds like a job for Perl, no? :)

-- 
Andy Armstrong, Hexten

---

From: Gaurav Vaidya <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:08:25 +0800

Hey Andy!

On 10 Oct 2008, at 12:45 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
> On 9 Oct 2008, at 17:37, Gaurav Vaidya wrote (on the Wiki):
>> "If it's easier to work on the draft in this Wiki, I'll volunteer  
>> to convert it into XML."
Haha, I thought there was going to be all kinds of idiosyncrasies and  
specific things to watch out for. It seemed to make sense to:
1. Perfect the draft on the Wiki.
2. Someone transcribes it into XML and compiles it to an RFC.
3. RFC is circulated, comments are collated and mistakes fixed <--  
might be a job for SVN/git/etc.
4. RFC is sent to the IETF - which will then promptly email it back  
to everyone in the "authors" list for final checks.
5. Final checks complete, I-D published - for the next 185 days, anyway.

But if we're going to be generating RFCs for internal circulation  
more frequently than that, it *would* make sense to write a MediaWiki  
-> XML (or MediaWiki -> RFC) Perl converter. A few months ago that  
would have excited me, but I get to code *plenty* of Perl at work  
these days. So my Perl needs are satiated :-).

As an aside: as per RFC 2418, the Area Director can assign us a  
"Consultant from among the ranks of senior IETF participants" to help  
us do this right. What're the odds we can get someone who really  
understands RFCs and writing standards? It'd be awful if we get  
started, do something wrong, and then have to start all over again.

cheers,
Gaurav