|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Thanks for the work and help. We will start the next ballot cycle after the September meeting and then open to collect comments to update our modules and draft.
You can comment on the modules at github now (https://github.com/YangModels/yang/tree/master/standard/ieee/802.3/draft ) and I will collect them (including issues and how to resolve them) from github for the group to consider in the next ballot cycle.
Otherwise, you can also provide comments against the modules/draft directly and send your comments to our Editor Marek Hajduczenia (Marek.Hajduczenia@xxxxxxxxxxx) and myself. Both are good.
For the revision date update, even a single “revision” statement, we would have to submit a comment every time to change the dates…
Thank you very much.
From: Mark Ellison [mailto:mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
I am available to work with the group on other warnings as well as module metadata.
Regarding the omission of a "revision" statement- I understand not wanting to have an accumulating number of revision statements for a module in development. Note there is a middle path between all or nothing, the following excerpt appears
on page 12 of RFC 6087, "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of YANG Data Model Documents":
"It is acceptable to reuse the same revision statement within
unpublished versions (i.e., Internet-Drafts), but the revision date
MUST be updated to a higher value each time the Internet-Draft is re-
Thus, an alternative would be to maintain a single "revision" sub-statement across iterations of a work-in-progress and just change the revision date each iteration.
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:44 PM Zhuangyan (Yan) <zhuangyan.zhuang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-YANG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-YANG&A=1