Merge current modules from yc.o

[xorrkaz]

No description provided.

[einarnn]

@xorrkaz will you be investigating the check failure?

[xorrkaz]

I have. The fault lies with me. I'm trying to do better, but yc.o is still a back-burner project for me.

[vvilimek]

To fix the checks, you can apply attached patch
ietf-template@2023-07-26.yang.patch

[xorrkaz]

We have to be a bit "easy" on the extracted-from-drafts set of modules as those can and will have errors. I don't think we should fix them outside of the automation process. That said, the authors of the template draft might appreciate your patch.

[vvilimek]

Agreed. Also, it is hard to find the original source of the YANG module. But why is draft included in the standard/RFC dir?

[vvilimek]

So the ietf-template@2023-07-26.yang is part of RFC 9907: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG Data Models. Don't ask me why the module is not well-formed. We might try to fix the syntax errors by erratum, but for now, I think it would be easier and faster to just exclude the file from the performed checks. There is no way the latest ietf-template would passed the required checks. This is better solution than applying the patch because we want to keep same file content as from the RFC document.

[xorrkaz]

Ha! I saw template, and I thought this was the template work being discussed in NETMOD. Errata might be declined since what they're doing is intentional. They're even registering this with IANA...hmmm. Let me reach out to Med and let him know the impact this is having.

[xorrkaz]

These are Med's comments on this:

The registration is mainly to avoid that name is used by other modules.
 
Please note that 9907 registered it as well because this was the approach followed since 6087:
 
ietf-template
ietf-template@2010-05-18.yang
N
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-template
temp
[RFC6087]
ietf-template
ietf-template@2016-03-20.yang
N
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-template
temp
[RFC8407]
ietf-template
ietf-template@2023-07-26.yang
N
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-template
temp
[RFC9907]
 
The approach in 9907 was to avoid blind copy/paste and let the authors complete relevant part of the template. I understand this has the side effect of breaking validation, but that’s OK.

I'm not happy with the, "that's okay" response. This is the only standard module that is syntactically incorrect. But, it doesn't bode well for any errata to get it fixed. So, it may be better for Einar to special-case this module in the CI flow.

[xorrkaz]

See #1703 for a workaround for this going forward.

[vvilimek]

Haha, same response.

..., but that's ok.

Nice. I was not expecting that. I am having a great fun 😄 ! The rationale makes sense.