-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix references resolved by xml2rfc #185
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
The xml2rfc tool could not resolve the references in the yang-module-versioning draft. Also removes rfc-6991-bis reference, unused import, see #172.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks fine to me
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.8525'?> | ||
<?ref include='reference.I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-semver'?> | ||
<?ref include='reference.I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis'?> | ||
<?rfc include='reference.RFC.2119.xml'?> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure why we need to add .xml to the references, this looks unusual to me. But I agree with removing the stale reference to rfc6991-bis
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, we import ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis in the YANG module, so I think that the fix is to go the other way and explicitly state and reference that module.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please can you still check that it works with:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
xml2rfc --legacy works fine. Should I migrate the document to xml2rfc v3 instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it'd be great if you could do that.
The xml2rfc tool could not resolve the references in the yang-module-versioning draft.
Also removes rfc-6991-bis reference, unused import, see #172.