datatracker
datatracker copied to clipboard
ietf-tools
feat: show active adhoc groups on group menu. Fixes #4339.
This is gross.
Please pull the PR and look at the result. I don't think it's what we really want.
Why is the stuff in the screenshot gross? I think this is better than not showing these at all.
I worry that exposing name "Ad Hoc" will upset/confuse people, and that the ad-hoc manner of giving these groups parents or not will raise organizational structural questions. Why is "hotrfc" an IETF parented group, for instance? (Answer, because as we were hacking in the ability to show it on the agenda, we needed it to be that - later, we hacked in groups like IEPG without that requirement). If you want to address reconciling things like those by throwing it out for global public comment, we could send it out as is, but I really wonder if there shouldn't be some thought about whether the modeling makes the most sense first.
Also, I cringe at the accident of alphabetization of the other menu. Ordering can be misinterpreted to be "this is what we want you to look at first".
Finally, I want to take advantage of the above screenshot to point out a consequence of group names re: another issue you've raised. If we change the group type name for rfcedtyp away from "RFC Editor", the string on the menu line above "Other" will change.
Would a better approach to be to give these groups different shapes/homes, e.g., directorates, teams, etc.?
All of these could become teams under GEN, IMO, and we could eliminate the concept of an "ad hoc group".
Making them genarea teams would address my discomfort completely - would, e.g, the IEPG organizers have any issue with that?
I've done this to the sandbox (effects will only last until it resets its database tomorrow). If we go down this path, I will need to make it so that teams have full meeting materials support (which should just be groupfeatures configuration). Where/if these things appear in the group filters on the meeting agenda page will also change.