GitHub AUTH48 experiment: RFC 9245

GitHub repo for RFC 9245 (using markdown)

• Process
  • forked https://github.com/larseggert/bcp45bis
  • suggested updates input as PRs
  • issues for open questions or comments
  • inital PRs:
    • reference updates
    • header updates
    • basic editorial updates
    • everything else as PRs or issues

This process requires a more knowledgeable GitHub user on the RPC side. There were many suggestions about “good GitHub practice.” Some of these suggestions are from discussion with the author and some from the survey:

Author preference for:

• improve subject lines
• consider whether external parties should be allowed to close issues
• close out all issues/PRs once they're addressed
• improve “size” of issues

This process requires a more knowledgeable GitHub user on the RPC side. There were many suggestions about “good GitHub practice.” Some of these suggestions are from discussion with the author and some are from the post-pub survey.

Author preference for:

• improve subject lines
• consider whether external parties should be allowed to close issues
• close out all issues/PRs once they're addressed
• improve “size” of issues

Forking the repository can be confusing. I found myself looking at both to compare things and sometimes found myself confused about whether I was in the right repo. If we fork, we should consider whether/how to clear all earlier branches.

• What were the advantages of using GitHub during AUTH48?
  • Lars Eggert (author): Easier review of proposed changes; compartmentalized discussion

• What were the disadvantages of using GitHub during AUTH48?
  • Lars Eggert (author): RPC needs to fine-tune their GitHub use a bit more

• Was communication clear and easy to follow?
  • Lars Eggert (author): Yes

• Were there any aspects of communication that were challenging?
  • Lars Eggert (author): No

• How may we improve the README.md?
  • Lars Eggert (author): (no response)

• Were the issues appropriately “sized”?
  • Lars Eggert (author): No

• Were the issue labels helpful (e.g., rfced, question, editor-ready)?
  • Lars Eggert (author): Yes

• In particular, did you find the process more efficient than the current email-based process?
  • Lars Eggert (author): Yes

• What parts of the process would you like to see changed in a future experiment?
  • Lars Eggert (author): Use more of GitHub's features

• ADs and WG Chairs: Was it easy to track the discussion and resulting updates?
  • (no response)

• Please provide any other comments and suggestions for improvement here.
  • Lars Eggert (author): (no response)

• May we quote your replies on a public page documenting the experiment?
  • Lars Eggert (author): Yes