Minutes IETF104: git
minutes-104-git-00

# GIT WG @ IETF 104

2019-03-28 @ 11:50-12:20 CET
Congress Hall 3 (LL)

## Administrivia

### Do we want to use GitHub?

* "duh"
* Keep (as best as possible) substantive discussion on the mailing list

### WG Tools and Projects

* What other tools would help WGs?

  - Wiki for capturing ideas and info
  - We should document existing tools to improve understanding their use
  - We should document the entire process to improve understanding their
  integration - Many in room willing to help improve and maintain documentation

## GitHub Configuration for IETF Working Groups

* Need resolve duplication between this document and
draft-thomson-git-using-github.

## Using GitHub in the IETF

* Worth documenting details with the time that it was valid
* Some discussion in the document for how to evolve would be useful

* How to deal with these drafts and changes in tooling / processes
  - This can document the guidelines that WGs maintain their details
  - Find a way to conceptually separate the static pieces from those that are
  dynamic - This document can remain an I-D - There are efforts in IESG to
  define living documents

* Is there a good sense of normative vs. informative?
  - Having a higher level (normative?) document and keep more concrete
  information here

* On advice on consensus (on how and when processes are put in place)
  - Note that having an issue does not mean it must be discussed in the working
  group - Issues do not reflect the consensus of the working group - (QUIC
  started using project boards to help evolve processes) - If splitting "light
  vs heavy" description, then move this advice to the "heavy" - Keeping this
  information can be useful to newcomers to a WG and is helpful for newly
  forming or new-to-GitHub WGs

* **Adoption of this document?** -- consensus in room to adopt, and chairs will
confirm on the list
  - Note that the document can change radically
  - Change "heavy" to note it is an option
  - Chairs will take this to <wgchairs@ietf.org> for their contributions

* **Volunteers to co-author?**
  - Chairs will solicit for volunteers to co-author
  - Mike Bishop offered to help

* Suggested next step is to break out the concrete actions make sense
  - If valuable, progress both this document and an update to BCP 25
  - Charter states that "not changing existing processes [BCP 9]", while the
  discussion is about adding to the processes - Actual changes to processes is
  not within scope for this working group