[ncc-services-wg] Should we have a RIPE archivist?
Gert Doering gert at space.net
Fri Apr 27 11:27:44 CEST 2018
Hi, On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 09:21:03AM +0000, Job Snijders wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:13:47AM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 01:32:23PM +0430, Arash Naderpour wrote: > > > -1, > > > > > > It doesn't make sense to me at this stage. > > > > Why, exactly? In Address-Policy, for example, many of the current policies > > go back to discussions we had years and years ago. So having more easily > > accessible archives of "old discussions" would help newcomers to understand > > better why things evolved the way they did... > > If APWG feels there is a need to guide newcomers, APWG can write a FAQ > or newcomers document themselves. This should be a working group > activity. I was just pointing out one example where Arash, as an active APWG participant, could see benefit in having easy access to old discussions. Doing this WG by WG does not seem like reasonable use of WG resources. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-services-wg/attachments/20180427/2287c5cb/attachment.sig>