From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom9=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Fri May 1 21:10:44 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom9 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom9@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id C7F103587B3; Fri, 1 May 2020 21:10:44 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63B933568AC for ; Fri, 1 May 2020 21:10:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7F985C039E for ; Fri, 1 May 2020 15:10:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap21 ([10.202.2.71]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 01 May 2020 15:10:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=certik.us; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm2; bh=1heXL o5Bnc87vZIjlWCjjjSM0BrraNUb2SxnjImVMI8=; b=XdGNagZnnHkYm5cIpHgIq +cN9NLFTPnYY+xqcbIsZaK/GJ7CkgByWjCax+BsZWKXpoUf71hbwHsflGqGS/KgV IWLG8mZbWp/iHUAuEcRxxoGbXloknMIQixTLBWXkEOmtuDObhpA5qb9lkQRoBWii 4N+ruNX3xnBC2aqpxAOqJZyoD2UG1JCsaBVNBA5GXX+164290uUZVCJMtWeA6gKL ZRd4H+JC7+k1/7u7zH8Rml7/UDyiqlQhmXVBVL7V1FsLGHPoZc1ZonG+scpYw2nS Cj+J0Qt1WjdsICKr9LkMI9RnWx0L+uFbwXb5JrRpvZAzBHn+5EZapcSnUm+baC+q Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=1heXLo5Bnc87vZIjlWCjjjSM0BrraNUb2SxnjImVM I8=; b=xxFsf0cx8aCGyh8Qhl+f1k/LomS55O9SjgWiDL++U1LtWstTZ/D5bKAvC L4Fxf/SDMg6PF6+dnyKsnxOZhSRnt0lFe8/zPqhn4Y7aajAClc2ez5n65Qi0GMUn Kye4Qm7aEfDupm0aRWqcVUlau3+c8jzeJ1pJiuoYX0CHr/GaaoPixSEOspUduOoR L50tfF7DxcKuZcUKxmMfspSYqNaK0nHhc3dM79z4DvUZIRHmHwpGGvag7LcVbo3F Gb03viKc3gVpsHRlPj6PJD6pAWHrv+JAjp1O45vvk0dW5ETuSjkBCcq0UHVWOpCb TTb5BYod60A692itiGdAiVZZk/uBA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrieejgddufeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucgoufhushhpvggtthffohhmrghinhculdegledmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpefqnhgu rhgvjhgpvegvrhhtvohkuceoohhnughrvghjsegtvghrthhikhdruhhsqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpeegtdeltefgieefueekgedvleefgfekjeeujefgveegveefieefuefgfffh heehgeenucffohhmrghinhepjhefqdhfohhrthhrrghnrdhorhhgpdhgihhthhhusgdrtg homhdpfihgvddurdhlihhnkhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhep mhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehonhgurhgvjhestggvrhhtihhkrdhush X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 46C0B660081; Fri, 1 May 2020 15:10:37 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.0-dev0-351-g9981f4f-fmstable-20200421v1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <2daef63b-2ab5-4216-9e06-dbaa3be4bdbc@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20200430235418.234049DB117@www.open-std.org> References: <20200428004737.19A4F9DB145@www.open-std.org> <20200428114456.5CCDA3568A1@www.open-std.org> <999548a1-9f82-418c-b8be-1fd87f94d3be@www.fastmail.com> <20200428172340.851A13568A1@www.open-std.org> <20200428195502.E072C3568BB@www.open-std.org> <5a392c04-ddab-46e6-8024-ae89b8658d29@www.fastmail.com> <20200428225409.F33B13587B3@www.open-std.org> <20200429083749.4E7369DB117@www.open-std.org> <20200429180015.B38E83568A1@www.open-std.org> <20200430235418.234049DB117@www.open-std.org> Date: Fri, 01 May 2020 13:10:16 -0600 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Ond=C5=99ej_=C4=8Cert=C3=ADk?= To: "WG5 List" Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_[J3]_(SC22WG5.6204)_[EXTERNAL]_Re:_RE:_[ukfortran]_October?= =?UTF-8?Q?_meeting_visa_invitation_letter?= Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk Dear Committee, Bryce, thank you for this detailed explanation how C++ does it. That's p= recisely what I am trying to get the Fortran Committee to eventually do = also. But step by step in an evolutionary matter, so we first created th= e J3 GitHub repository, tried it for a few papers, it was a success, the= n we'll try for more papers, until we get there. A few people suggested this is a revolution. It's not. This is a well te= sted workflow, from other committees, as well as our own Fortran Committ= ee on a few papers. Revolution would be if we got rid of the j3-fortran.= org website and did not post papers there at all, and only used GitHub. = That's not what we are doing. We are supplementing the primary place j3-= fortran.org to discuss papers with a secondary place at GitHub to track = each idea / papers and have a platform for discussion / work between mee= tings. But at meetings, we are still using j3-fortran.org to submit pap= ers and to vote on them. Steve contemplated perhaps hosting some board ourselves. Please don't do= that, unless you understand well all the Cons of that approach: * we will have to build a community again there --- it was a *lot* of wo= rk that I and others had to put into the J3 GitHub site. Somebody will h= ave to put in the same amount of work to make it a success. * it will not be as easy for people to contribute, because people have t= o create yet another login that they have to remember, and not just comm= ittee members, but every single member of the wide community that we wan= t to attract. All of them already have logins at GitHub. In fact, every = voting member of the J3 committee already has an account at GitHub, see = here where I collected all the GitHub IDs: https://github.com/j3-fortran= /fortran_proposals/issues/155, the only voting members that are not ther= e yet is Dan, Van and Bob. I am happy to help each of them personally (o= ff the mailinglist). * it will be yet another place to discuss things. * We have to actively maintain the service. That's non-trivial time that= somebody has to invest into it. Bryce explained in another email that there is no perfect solution, and = in practice, GitHub does work well. If, however, there comes up an insur= mountable obstacle in practice (not in theory) why we cannot use GitHub,= only then let's bite the bullet and move to our self-hosted GitLab, tha= t Reuben and I offer to maintain for the Committee, that will provide al= l the features that we need from GitHub, but it will be open source soft= ware, hosted by ourselves (but with all the Cons mentioned above). Until then, please let's just continue using GitHub. It works really wel= l, and instead of starting over, let's rather keep building the communit= y and invite them to submit and collaborate with us on even more papers = for the next meeting. Thank you, Ondrej On Thu, Apr 30, 2020, at 5:53 PM, Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash via J= 3 wrote: > There are plenty of ISO and INCITS working groups that conduct > business on GitHub. >=20 > For ISO WG21 and INCITS PL22.16 (C++), we have mailing lists, and we > make extension use of GitHub. >=20 > https://github.com/cplusplus >=20 > Every paper is tracked by a GitHub issue: >=20 > https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues >=20 > Using wg21.link, our lookup service, you can easily get a paper and > locate the GitHub issue and status for a paper: >=20 > http://wg21.link/P1255 <- link to the latest revision of the paper > http://wg21.link/P1255R1 <- link to revision 1 of the paper > http://wg21.link/P1255/github <- GitHub issue and current status for a= paper >=20 > As you can see from the last link, the GitHub issue for each paper > includes a comment with a summary of each discussion of said paper, > including poll results and the guidance to authors. The GitHub issue > tracks the progress of the paper, from initial incubation, through > design review groups, through wording review groups, and ending with > the issue being closed after a pull request has been made to the > sources for the standard applying the change. >=20 > National Body comments are processed on GitHub: >=20 > https://github.com/cplusplus/nbballot >=20 > Issues are tracked via GitHub: >=20 > https://github.com/cplusplus/issues/issues >=20 > The Latex sources for the standard are on GitHub: >=20 > https://github.com/cplusplus/draft >=20 > The Project Editor and his assistants manage changes to the standard > via pull requests: >=20 > https://github.com/cplusplus/draft/pulls >=20 > Major editing projects are tracked via GitHub projects: >=20 > https://github.com/cplusplus/draft/projects/1 >=20 > Subgroup agendas for face to face meetings are created using GitHub pr= ojects: >=20 > https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/projects/19 >=20 > ISO WG21/INCITS PL22.16 is about 1 order of magnitude larger than > WG5/J3; we have about ~250 people from ~15 national bodies and ~25 > active study groups at each of our face to face meetings. We have > people from all sorts of backgrounds, organizations, and countries, > with all sorts of different requirements. Some people can't or won't > use any Google services; some people disable Javascript in their web > browser. These limitations have not prevented us from making use of > organizational tools. The number of such individuals is small, so > we're able to make accomodations, and not everyone has to use or have > access to everything. Some people just participate via the mailing > list, some people just participate at face to face meetings, some > people just participate on GitHub or Slack. The only people who need > to have access to and use all of the different services are the > officers and leadership. >=20 > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:00 AM Van Snyder via J3 > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2020-04-29 at 15:10 +0000, Bill Long via J3 wrote: > > > some people have an aversion to, and concerns about, products fro= m > > > Microsoft (of which GitHub is one, and Skype another). Google an= d > > > Facebook have acquired tarnished reputations as well. And don=E2= =80=99t get > > > the cyber security folks started about ZOOM. > > > > I believe IEEE P1722 did everything via a-mail. I believe they did n= ot > > have any face-to-face meetings. Ultimately, formal "motions" were > > circulated, which contained edits. These were passed (or rejected) w= ith > > formal e-mail ballots. > > > > I haven't asked my contacts in WG9 and ARG, but it seems the Ada > > committees do a lot of work via e-mail. They have a yearly meeting,= > > usually in conjunction with Ada Europe and the Conference on Softwar= e > > Reliability, about three days total. I don't know for sure, but base= d on > > the number of different names I see in e-mail traffic, I think WG9 h= as > > more members than WG5. > > > > Not to say the WG5 and J3 could switch to that mode tomorrow, or tha= t we > > would find it useful to move rapidly in that direction, but some peo= ple > > have made it work. > > > > At least we ought to try to get more done via e-mail between meeting= s, > > especially so that we don't get ambushed on Friday after working all= > > week on a project. > > > > >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash > US Programming Language Standards (PL22) Chair > ISO C++ Library Evolution Chair > CppCon and C++Now Program Chair > CUDA Core C++ Libraries (Thrust, CUB, libcu++) Lead @ NVIDIA > -- >