[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,

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