[Infrastructure] Preparation of review period for SC30 and SC31
Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)
dzacharo at harica.gr
Mon Jul 20 21:42:24 MST 2020
I would appreciate a review of the last two sections added in
https://wiki.cabforum.org/github_redline_guide before removing the
"under construction".
Thank you,
Dimitris.
On 2020-07-20 9:32 μ.μ., Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) wrote:
>
> I was out of office today so apologies for replying late. The result
> of the process is very good and I plan on adding specific instructions
> on https://wiki.cabforum.org/github_redline_guide. Until we reach the
> next milestone of automatically creating a red-line, we can create a
> final version in the Pull Request, and compare against the existing
> main branch.
>
> I have attached the resulting docx redline BRs between 1.7.0 and
> ballots SC30+31 using the two docx versions I got from the links
> provided by Jos and Ryan.
>
> Does this look good to everyone? I will do a more detailed review
> myself tomorrow morning (Greek time) before posting to the public lists.
>
> Once again, a big thanks to Jos and Ryan for working on this automation.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Dimitris.
>
>
> On 2020-07-20 8:40 μ.μ., Ryan Sleevi wrote:
>> Dimitris: Did that work for you? I didn't hear back so wasn't sure if
>> you were sorted now with https://github.com/cabforum/documents/pull/203
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 3:09 PM Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)
>> <dzacharo at harica.gr <mailto:dzacharo at harica.gr>> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you both for the quick response. I recall the instructions
>> posted by Ryan; unfortunately I am not so familiar with these
>> processes. I will read them more carefully during the weekend. In
>> the meantime, if you succeed in getting a combined SC30/SC31 docx
>> against the BRs 1.7.0 sent by Jos earlier today, that would save
>> me a lot of time.
>>
>>
>> Dimitris.
>>
>>
>> On 17/7/2020 6:59 μ.μ., Jos Purvis (jopurvis) wrote:
>>>
>>> Sounds good, Ryan! Dimitris, the link I provided is the official
>>> DOCX from the official master branch: that’s the 1.7.0 version
>>> of the current master-branch BRs. So that’s the current clean
>>> master version, against which you can compare something from the
>>> ballot outputs to create a binary redline. The trick is getting
>>> you something from the SC30/SC31 branches to create that redline
>>> against. 😊Ryan, I’ll have a look at it today when I have a
>>> chance as well and see if I can sort it.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jos Purvis (jopurvis at cisco.com <mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com>)
>>> .:|:.:|:. cisco systems | Cryptographic Services
>>> PGP: 0xFD802FEE07D19105 | Controls and Trust Verification
>>>
>>> *From: *Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com> <mailto:sleevi at google.com>
>>> *Date: *Friday, July 17, 2020 at 11:50 AM
>>> *To: *Dimitris Zacharopoulos <dzacharo at harica.gr>
>>> <mailto:dzacharo at harica.gr>
>>> *Cc: *"Jos Purvis (jopurvis)" <jopurvis at cisco.com>
>>> <mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com>, "infrastructure at cabforum.org"
>>> <mailto:infrastructure at cabforum.org>
>>> <infrastructure at cabforum.org> <mailto:infrastructure at cabforum.org>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Infrastructure] Preparation of review period for
>>> SC30 and SC31
>>>
>>> https://archive.cabforum.org/pipermail/infrastructure/2020-May/000223.html for
>>> the instructions
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 11:48 AM Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com
>>> <mailto:sleevi at google.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Let me dig out the previous e-mail from our discussions
>>> about this.
>>>
>>> The answer is "No, it won't work", and I was offering to get
>>> to it once I'm nearer to a computer that can do that.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 11:43 AM Dimitris Zacharopoulos
>>> <dzacharo at harica.gr <mailto:dzacharo at harica.gr>> wrote:
>>>
>>> That's fine.
>>>
>>> Do we have the artifacts from the current official
>>> master branch? I can create a PR on our official repo,
>>> that contains the commits of both ballots if that
>>> automatically creates new artifacts. Then, I can use MS
>>> word to compare the display the changes, thus creating a
>>> redline.
>>>
>>> Would this work?
>>>
>>> DZ.
>>>
>>> Jul 17, 2020 18:32:10 Jos Purvis (jopurvis)
>>> <jopurvis at cisco.com <mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com>>:
>>>
>>> Hmmm. So I know we’ve never produced uploaded
>>> artifacts from PRs /from other people’s forks/,
>>> which makes sense—I thought that was the discussion.
>>> We’ve been producing artifacts from PRs of branches
>>> actually on the cabforum repo, though, because a
>>> quick peruse of the S3 bucket contents shows a
>>> folder for each cabforum/documents branch up through
>>> pandoc-travis-changes.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jos Purvis (jopurvis at cisco.com
>>> <mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com>)
>>> .:|:.:|:. cisco systems | Cryptographic Services
>>> PGP: 0xFD802FEE07D19105 | Controls and Trust
>>> Verification
>>>
>>> *From: *Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com
>>> <mailto:sleevi at google.com>>
>>> *Date: *Friday, July 17, 2020 at 11:07 AM
>>> *To: *"Jos Purvis (jopurvis)" <jopurvis at cisco.com
>>> <mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com>>
>>> *Cc: *"Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)"
>>> <dzacharo at harica.gr <mailto:dzacharo at harica.gr>>,
>>> "infrastructure at cabforum.org
>>> <mailto:infrastructure at cabforum.org>"
>>> <infrastructure at cabforum.org
>>> <mailto:infrastructure at cabforum.org>>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Infrastructure] Preparation of
>>> review period for SC30 and SC31
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 10:50 AM Jos Purvis
>>> (jopurvis) <jopurvis at cisco.com
>>> <mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Dimitris,
>>>
>>> For the current version in Word format, you can
>>> fetch it from this link:
>>> https://cabforum-travis-artifacts.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/builds/master/BR.docx
>>>
>>> That's the same link as the PDF from the front
>>> page of the CABF repository, but with the
>>> extension changed to docx (we need to update the
>>> README on the repository to reflect the new
>>> formats and whatnot!).
>>>
>>> For the SC30 and SC31 ballots, the Travis build
>>> completed successfully, but it doesn't look like
>>> it uploaded the resulting artifacts to S3. Ryan,
>>> is that something we need to fix? (Looks like
>>> that used to be the default and isn't anymore?)
>>>
>>> I think there's some confusion. It was never the
>>> default to upload artifacts for PRs. This is the
>>> whole discussion about the need to create a
>>> dedicated branch within the main CABF repository,
>>> then create a PR using that, to have the artifact
>>> produced. I'll see about doing that later today.
>>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Infrastructure mailing list
> Infrastructure at cabforum.org
> https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20200721/ed0b2987/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Infrastructure
mailing list