Subject: Using resources of a closed WG

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:49:17 -0400

I was looking at possibilities for issue tracking for some AD-sponsored 
drafts left over from the Behave WG (now closed). I've worked out a 
scheme using the Wiki (one page per issue plus a top-level directory).

Given that Behave is closed, is it still possible to write to their Wiki 
or do we need a project-specific setup (with scalability implications if 
more people want to do the same thing)?

And who has write access to the Behave resources if they can be used: 
the ex-chairs, no one, or anyone with IETF credentials?

Tom Taylor

For anyone interested, here is the per-issue template I want to maintain 
on the Wiki pages:

In the top-level directory page:
1. Document or project name
2. Project Manager: the person (maybe more than one) responsible for 
keeping the Wiki pages up to date, especially by summarizing discussion 
content and reflecting it into the Issue Details and Proposed Resolution 
sections of the issues pages. That person would also be responsible for 
feeding back the latest version of those two sections to the list. Lots 
of work, but nothing more than we have to do anyway.
3. Tabulation of issues: date opened, title, link to page, latest 
update, date closed.

Per issue:
1. Issue Title (could change as issue is refined, in which case the 
change is shown along with the original here and in the top-level directory)
2. Issue Details
3. Proposed Resolution
4. Adopted Resolution
5. Links to related messages on the list. This is the one piece of work 
we don't do now. I wouldn't wish the task on someone faced with the 
message storms we sometimes see, but in our case it should be a 
low-volume activity. My main concern is accountability and traceability.

Every update to the items on the per-issue page will be dated.

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 17:31:09 +0200

Hi Tom,

> Given that Behave is closed, is it still possible to write to their Wiki

Yes.

> the ex-chairs, no one, or anyone with IETF credentials?

The default is the last alternative you mention.  The chairs can change
that.

Best regards,

	Henrik

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:31:55 -0500

Is there a reason you don't want to use the Issue tracker for this?
 AFAICT, you (and anyone with a tools login) can still add new tickets for
the BEHAVE WG and there's lots of options for sorting the information.
But, I do not believe you can edit the wiki itself. It seems that's only
chairs.   You can add a lot of the per issue information you mention in the
ticket.  I often add links to mailing list discussions or meeting
minutes/presentations.

Mary.

On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> drafts left over from the Behave WG (now closed). I've worked out a scheme
> using the Wiki (one page per issue plus a top-level directory).
>
> And who has write access to the Behave resources if they can be used: the
> ex-chairs, no one, or anyone with IETF credentials?
>
> Tom Taylor
>
> feeding back the latest version of those two sections to the list. Lots of
> work, but nothing more than we have to do anyway.
> 3. Tabulation of issues: date opened, title, link to page, latest update,
> date closed.
>
> Per issue:
> 1. Issue Title (could change as issue is refined, in which case the change
> is shown along with the original here and in the top-level directory)
> 2. Issue Details
> 3. Proposed Resolution
> 4. Adopted Resolution
> 5. Links to related messages on the list. This is the one piece of work we
> don't do now. I wouldn't wish the task on someone faced with the message
> storms we sometimes see, but in our case it should be a low-volume
> activity. My main concern is accountability and traceability.
>

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:54:23 -0400

The Wiki write issue seems to be answered.

The reason I wanted to go with my template rather than the Issue Tracker 
is because the template has worked for me when I've chaired other 
small-to-medium scale projects, and the process is much cleaner. I can 
even prepare my Wiki text offline and just plop it in, which is useful 
when I have access problems as I've had occasionally in the last few 
days (router meltdowns?).

Tom