Running an IETF Hackathon
draft-ietf-shmoo-hackathon-08
Yes
(Lars Eggert)
(Paul Wouters)
No Objection
(Zaheduzzaman Sarker)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.
Éric Vyncke
Yes
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, Regards, -éric ## COMMENTS ### 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 email. ``` ### 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. [ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md [ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
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.
Lars Eggert Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Unknown
Paul Wouters Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Not sent
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: https://www.ietf.org/support-us/sponsorship/#running-code I didn't check other links, but it would be a good idea to do so.
Erik Kline Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(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 Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2022-07-12 for -07)
Sent
Thanks for this interesting document.
Minor:
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.
Nits:
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
starts.
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
s/schedule/scheduled/
Murray Kucherawy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(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 Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(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. Regards, Rob
Zaheduzzaman Sarker Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent