On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 2:27 PM Kent Watsen <kwat...@juniper.net> wrote:
> >> PS: I've been too busy to setup a virtual meeting for us to finish the > >> review of the YANG-next items in the GitHub tracker. But things are > >> just beginning to free up a little for me now. Would folks like to > >> have a meeting before 104 to finish that review? > > > > I think that's what the side meeting would do - review the current > > items to see what makes sense. > > Sure, but perhaps the in-person time would be better spent analyzing the > results of the reviews? Recall that we're trying to score each item on > three axis: importance, complexity, backward-compatibility. > > I agree with this approach. It is too easy to get bogged down on how a solution might work (or worse, let's compare 2 or 3 different solutions right now) and never finish the issue list. There are spot solutions in progress (e.g., on-change notification, yang-data) that might be much better handled with robust generalized solutions in YANG. I have some concern that a patchwork of optional extensions is worse for end-users in the long-term, than a new YANG language version. Current results here: > https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-next/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Acreated-asc > . > > At the rate we were going (about 40% done), I imagine it taking 2-4 hours > to score the remaining issues. This may not be an issue if we can meet > multiple times during the week but, if time is tight, I'd rather have this > part done before we meet. > > Kent // contributor > > > Andy
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
