Hi, Mahesh and all: We may have extreme case where a short live WG fulfills its purpose and gets concluded, who and how to maintain the WG github for experimental work, is there any rule to set for this? https://github.com/mjethanandani/veloce/issues/19 Talking with Mahesh, he think: " it has no difference from today. If a WG concludes today, and there are a few drafts that are still being worked upon, the AD generally moves them to another WG. " However I expect for the updated module, such module should be updated and maintained in the same WG github as the initial version of YANG module. If one WG gets concluded, We move updated model development in the new working group, it seems to mean we abandon the existing WG github which maintain the initial version of YANG model and create a new github In the new Working group. So where to keep track of the changes to the initial version of YANG module if we don't maintain the initial version of module and updated module in the same IETF hosted repository. We may face several corner cases: Case 1: When initial version of YANG model was developed, there is no WG github to be created for such module. Case 2. When initial version of YANG model was developed, it is maintained in the Individual github. Case 3. When YANG module are updated for several times, YANG module was maintained in the multiple WG github repos or individual github repos with various different toolchains setting.
I think we should make consistent rule for IETF host repository maintenance. Should YANG module be maintained in each responsible WG or in a common place for all the YANG modules, e.g., https://github.com/YangModels/yang Here is the proposed change to the VELOCE: https://github.com/mjethanandani/veloce/pull/26 -Qin _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
