BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested
Charles N Wyble
charles at thefnf.org
Sun Mar 15 15:17:38 UTC 2015
Use a git repository.
Make tagged releases.
This enables far easier distributed editing, translating, mirroring etc. And you can still do whatever release engineering you want.
A wiki is a horrible solution for something like this.
On March 15, 2015 8:24:49 AM CDT, Rob Seastrom <rs at seastrom.com> wrote:
>William Norton <wbn at drpeering.net> writes:
>> Agreed - Hence the âCurrentâ in the title. Maybe the date of the
>> document will be the key to let people know that they have the most
>> current version.
>The date of a single document is of scant use in determining its
>currency unless there is some sort of requirement for periodic
>recertification and gratuitous reissue of BCOPs (for instance,
>anything with a date stamp more than 18 months in the past is
>by definition invalid). That seems like busy work to periodically
>affirm that a good idea is still a good idea, and I don't volunteer
>for this job. :)
>I'm on board for wholesale replacement of the document (with revision
>history preserved) rather than the RFC series approach.
>The wiki/living document approach others have suggested seems like a
>poor one to me, for the same reason that I dislike the current trend
>of "there's no release tarball, major release, point release, or
>regression testing - just git clone the repository" in free software
>development. Releng is hard and thankless but adds enormous value and
>serves as a forcing function for some level of review, cursory though
>it may be.
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
More information about the NANOG