Re: [Tools-discuss] Some oddities on IAB/IESG "WG pages"

[Henrik Levkowetz <henrik at levkowetz.com>]

Hi Pekka,

On 2008-03-06 08:33 Pekka Savola said the following:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
> > > Also, at least draft-iab-iwout-report is listed as Expired, even though 
> > > those should be RFC published (RFC4948 in this case).
> > Right.  Again, I'll point to the datatracker database being out of
> > date.  In this case, I do have alternative datasources to use; I'll
> > do a re-write to use the more direct source for this (i.e., publication
> > status).
>
> This seems to be due to the datatracker/database bug that affected a 
> couple of other documents as well (e.g., that's the reason why 
> 'draft-iab-dns-choices moved to Dead and its state is still Dead even 
> though it's in IAB's version of Last Call).  I recall discussing this 
> with Bill Fenner but can't find it in my mail archive.  The problem is 
> that when some documents were expired (some of them erroneously), the 
> datatracker moved them from whatever state they were at (the 
> dns-choices having been 'AD is watching') to Dead.

Ok.  The database needs correcting, anyway.

> I'd guess this issue is related.  Those documents which were expired 
> in this fashion and moved to Dead have fallen through the cracks in 
> their status has not been updated.
>
> > > On http://www3.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/, it's not obvious why 
> > > 'draft-zinin-early-review' is listed as an IESG document.
> > Well, right.  But guess what I'm going to say here ,;-) ...
> >
> > That what the ietf database has it classified as ,,:-}
> >
> > Suggestions for action/improvement?
>
> I wonder what IETF database you're talking about?  The public 
> datatracker does not know anything about draft-zinin-early-review.
> Is the information obtained from some other database or why doesn't it 
> show on the public datatracker?

The IETF database has a bit more data than what is shown in the public
datatracker; not, I believe, in order to hide anything, but simply as
a result of the design choices done for the interface (which could do
with a rewrite).

In other words, there's just one database, and that is the one which
holds both the information exposed through the public datatracker, and
through the IESG interface, and also used to generate various files
such as all_it.txt, 1id-index.txt, etc., and e.g. the meeting materials
pages.

> With regard to the two IAB documents, until a document moves out of 
> the "I-D exists" state, it appears it cannot be associated with WG or 
> group context.

I believe that's incorrect -- see for instance this file, generated
from the database:

 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/1id-index.txt

> As an improvement, I would consider WG documents all those documents 
> which have draft-ietf-<wg> or draft-{iab,iesg} naming and additionally 
> those which are specifically marked as a WG/group document in the 
> tracker.

That would be a step backwards.  Before I started parsing the 1id-index.txt,
I had a lot more documents which had the wrong state (shown as WG docs,
but weren't really or weren't any more), because I used the heuristics you
suggest...


Regards,

	Henrik

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Tools-discuss mailing list
Tools-discuss at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss