Subject: [Tools-implementation] Different topic: pointing to drafts from the datatracker

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 13:15:28 -0500

You've seen the thread with Carsten, Michael, and others about how the 
advent of v3 html has put pressure on what URLs for a draft that people 
might reference (from a paper).

I think there are many things we might do with the feedback in that 
thread. One is fairly quick and easy - I think we have places where the 
datatracker points to www.ietf.org/id/ for drafts. I propose we change 
all of those to point to www.ietf.org/archive/id instead.

RjS

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 14:58:16 -0400

Yes, that seems to be the quick fix to the request.

Russ

> On Sep 15, 2020, at 2:15 PM, Robert Sparks <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> You've seen the thread with Carsten, Michael, and others about how the advent of v3 html has put pressure on what URLs for a draft that people might reference (from a paper).
> 
> I think there are many things we might do with the feedback in that thread. One is fairly quick and easy - I think we have places where the datatracker points to www.ietf.org/id/ for drafts. I propose we change all of those to point to www.ietf.org/archive/id instead.
> 
> RjS
> 
> -- 
> Tools-implementation mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-implementation

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 14:31:58 +0200

Hi Robert,

> all of those to point to www.ietf.org/archive/id instead.

Sounds reasonable, although I think the only places we currently don't
point at /archive/id/ is in the draft announcement emails.  If we change
those, too, then maybe it's time to ask the IESG to simply ditch the
separate active drafts directory altogether.

Having seen how things worked 20 years ago, and how things have evolved,
the active-drafts repository made a lot of sense at a time when there
was no datatracker, no tools site, and the only way to get drafts was to
pull them (via http* or ftp) from the active drafts repository.  But
today, the utility of that in parallel with /archive/id/ is so marginal,
and the extra bother sufficiently large, that I think it could be time to
move to not having separate active drafts and archived drafts directories.

Best regards,

	Henrik

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:27:16 -0400

> On Sep 16, 2020, at 8:31 AM, Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Signed PGP part
> Hi Robert,
> 

I'm not sure that I totally agree.  I like to rsync the current drafts.  I do not want all of them on my laptop.

Russ

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:30:22 -0500

> I'm not sure that I totally agree.  I like to rsync the current drafts.  I do not want all of them on my laptop.
Would a place that let you choose what drafts you wanted with a filter 
work better for you? (Is all active drafts really what you want?)

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:31:38 +0200

Hi Russ,

On 2020-09-16 15:27, Russ Housley wrote:
> I'm not sure that I totally agree.  I like to rsync the current
> drafts.  I do not want all of them on my laptop.

That's a good point that I didn't think of.  Ack.

	Henrik