Subject: [proto-team] Adding IETF tracker support for IAB and IRTF document shepherds

From: Allison Mankin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 09:46:57 -0700

Hi, IRSG,

The PROTO team has drafted some proposed requirements for login access and
tracking states for IAB and IRTF document shepherds using the IETF
draft tracker.  We did this because there will be a big update to
the tracker to allow WG Chair shepherds to log in and do their work
in the tracker with new states supporting them (e.g. Working Group
Last Call) and new underlying access control, and we thought it
would make sense to provide support for you at the same time.

We've submitted a proto-team i-d, but until it pops out, you can find the
text at:

http://www1.tools.ietf.org/wg/proto/draft-ietf-proto-iab-irtf-tracker-ext/draft
- -ietf-proto-iab-irtf-tracker-ext-00.txt

It's very short.  Could folks read it and give us feedback?  

Allison

P.S. if you want to read the other part, the WG Chair update, you'll find that
at:

http://www1.tools.ietf.org/wg/proto/draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-tracker-ext/draft-
ietf-proto-wgchair-tracker-ext-00.txt

_______________________________________________
proto-team mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/proto-team

---

From: Allison Mankin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 11:03:47 -0700

John,

We slipped.  It also needs a next state of In RG Last Call,
at least.

Thanks for noticing this.

What other states would RGs find useful?  This is very
bare bones, to provide very simple tracking and transparency
for the drafts.

For instance, would you like to have 

 RG Document Awaiting Reviews

I'd propose some text like:

     This document needs reviews (possibly a certain number of reviews,
      at a minimum) before the publication process can proceed

      Possible next states: "Active WG Document", "Parked WG Document",
      "In RG Last Call", "In IRSG Evaluation", "Dead"

      Permitted sub-states: "0 reviews", "1 reviews", "2 reviews", "3
      reviews", "4 reviews", "5 reviews", "Awaiting MIB Doctor Review",
      *** More special review states ***
      (R-xxx)

 Some questions on this:  would this be used for internal RG required
 reviews if you have them, as well as the required IRSG reviews?  Is it 
 reasonal to overload it if that happens?  Would it be reasonable to
 leave the extra numbers there because of the potential for change?
 The tracker is very simplistic and we don't want to keep remodeling
 it.  If you have the potential to use it for internal required 
 reviews, do you want to have distinct states?

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 10 May 2006 13:38:15 -0400

> It's very short.  Could folks read it and give us feedback?

Seems to me that Active RG Document needs more next states than Parked or
Dead.  Or do I misunderstand the sequence of states?

Regards,
John Levine, [email-masked], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.