Skip to main content

Running an IETF Hackathon


Lars Eggert
Paul Wouters

No Objection

Zaheduzzaman Sarker

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.

Lars Eggert
Paul Wouters
Éric Vyncke
Comment (2022-07-12 for -07) Sent
# Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-shmoo-hackathon-07
CC @evyncke

Thank you for the work put into this document. A very nice and useful pre-meeting event.

Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be appreciated even if only for my own education).

Special thanks to Mallory Knodel for the shepherd's detailed write-up including the WG consensus and the justification of the intended status. 

I hope that this review helps to improve the document,




### Section 1

Can the text be a little softened:
   Code written in a
   programming language can be more illustrative and less
   confrontational than opinions expressed during a meeting or in an

### Section 3.1

   Consequently, the IETF
   decided to fund the Hackathon as part of the IETF meeting, with
   Hackathon sponsorship being on a best effort basis.
"IETF" or "IETF LLC" ?

### Section 3.2

Should the cost of small prizes/awards (symbolic of course but there were there at the beginning) and the cost of NOC people having to arrive earlier (my guess) be included in the cost ?

### Section 5.1

The navigation is rather Groups -> Other -> Active Teams 

### Section 5.3.2

I hope that there is still a cap, even if only to comply with fire department regulations ;-)

### Section 7.1

Learned a new word "Emcee", assuming it is acting as Maître de Cérémonie ;-)

## Notes

This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
[`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
individual GitHub issues. 

Erik Kline
No Objection
Comment (2022-07-11 for -07) Sent
# Internet AD comments for {draft-ietf-shmoo-hackathon-07}
CC @ekline

## Comments

### S5.8

* Consider expanding "IPv6 PD" to "IPv6 Prefix Delegation".

## Nits

### S1

* "who are not necessary developers" -> "who are not necessarily developers"

### S2.1

* "learn more about projects and team"
  -> "learn more about projects and the team", or
     "learn more about projects and teams", perhaps
John Scudder
No Objection
Comment (2022-07-12 for -07) Sent
Thanks for this interesting document.


1. In §5.1,

   Team.  From the Datatracker menu, navigate to "Other" -> "Active
   Teams" -> "Hackathon".  Here exists a Datatracker space for the

But when I look at the Datatracker "Other" menu, there's nothing about teams. I did eventually find it under "Groups" -> "Other" -> "Active Teams" -> "hackathon" (in lower case :-) So in short, "Groups" was missing at the beginning of the path.


2. In §2.1,

                                           As the IETF Hackathon serves
   as the start of the overall IETF meeting, we aim to strike a
   compromise that provides enjoy time to get valuable work accomplished
   without exhausting themselves before the main IETF meeting even
There's something broken in this sentence but I can't quite make out what it is. Maybe "enjoy" is supposed to be "everybody"?

3. Again in §2.1,

   and participants time to socialize and learn more about projects and
   team they might want to join.  The kickoff presentation and
   formalities are kept to minimum to leave as much time as possible for
   team to work together with their team on their projects.  The

s/team/teams/g (I guess, although that's a lot of "teams" in a row -- maybe the middle "team" is actually "them"?)

4. In §2.5,

   most convenient for them.  The kickoff and closing sessions were
   schedule to align with the time frame established for the IETF 108

Murray Kucherawy
No Objection
Comment (2022-07-13 for -07) Sent
I feel like I have to squint a bit to see how this fits into the SHMOO charter, as it reads more like a general guide to running Hackathons than it does to something specific to online-only events.  Only Section 2.5 really talks about the "Meet Online Only" part of SHMOO.
Robert Wilton
No Objection
Comment (2022-07-13 for -07) Sent
Thank you for this easy to read document that describes the many different parts that make up a successful hackathon. 

Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Comment (2022-07-12 for -07) Sent
** Section 1.  Per the opening paragraph, isn’t a goal of the Hackathon also verification and validation of in-flight IETF work?  Reference implementations to foster adoption of IETF work?

** Section 1.

      Bring developers and young people into IETF and get them exposed
      to and interested in the IETF

Consider “students”, “early career professionals” or “newcomers” instead of or in addition to “young people.”

** Section 1.
   Similarly, while the Hackathon is meant to
   attract newcomers and those who do not typically view themselves as
   standards people,

Who are “standards people”?

** Section 1.
   Group dynamics and blending of skill sets
   and perspectives are extremely valuable aspects of IETF Hackathons.

Per “Group dynamics … are extremely valuable …”, can the phrase “group dynamics” be more specific.  Which dynamics is the hackathon trying to foster?

** Section 1.
   Examples include, but are
   not limited to, interoperability of implementations, proof of
   concepts, and tools.

What is a “tool” if not a proof of concept?  Is this tooling to support the standards development process?

** Section 2.2.  Editorial.
   Initially, we did something similar as part of Bits and Bites

-- The voice in the sentence changed to first-person plural (we).

-- Is there more context to provide on Bits and Bites for those that might not be familiar.

** Section 2.3
   Champions are encouraged to look at the final agenda and determine
   time slots best suited to ensure attendance of Code Lounge sessions
   as well as any related working group sessions.  

The idea of “Code Lounge session” and the “Code Lounge” being open continuously would benefit from an explanation. Is there an expectation that the champion is scheduling things during IETF week?  I don’t see this scheduling in the roles and responsibilities section.

** Section 2.4.  Editorial.
   The IETF [CODE-SPRINT] develops tools that support the work of the
   IETF. The Code Sprint existed ... 

Using [CODE-SPRINT] after “IETF” is an odd place to put the reference.  Recommend putting it after “Code Sprint” in the second sentence.

** Section 9.1. An additional privacy consideration is the photography described in Section 7.5.  Perhaps mention the lanyard system to opt-out.
Zaheduzzaman Sarker
No Objection
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2022-07-11 for -07) Sent
The link to the "Running Code Sponsors" is out of date -- this is the right one:

I didn't check other links, but it would be a good idea to do so.