On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Michael Richardson
<mcr+ietf(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>
wrote:
For the third time in two days I find myself, when asking others for
opinions
about some text, pointing at github commit logs. With the beautiful
makefiles we often have, one can't even depend upon having a formatted .txt
version there!
You can fix this with better tooling within github and travis integration
fwiw. Checkout the httpbis github https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions
- you'll see the for each adopted draft the README.md has links to the
"editor's draft" in both txt and html as well as the working group draft.
The former is auto-generated on every push to the repo, the latter is a
pointer to datatracker.
I'm not arguing against updating data tracker more often - just saying this
'editor's draft' convention can work very well between official revisions
no matter the cadence a WG chooses.