discuss how eclipsed errata shall be handled

[mboe]

Previously we had an errata.patch file containing fixes to invalid details stored in an (immutable) errata file. This was mainly used to fix invalid section references. In the meantime, the content of the errata.patch was removed and all errata files containing errors have been duplicated (to be clear: the associated annotation file of the erratum has been duplicated) and corrected. These annotation files are located in a separate git repository and will be used when running our tool. The tool itself identifies whether the original errata (annotation) files have been eclipsed by the manually corrected files described above. Usually the original, eclipsed errata annotations are NOT shown.

However, this is only the default. You can override this by adding special css. Doing so, the original erratum is shown, too.

Therefore all _generated annotations are handled, regardless, whether they are eclipsed or not. Therefore invalid section references are printed, if not fixed by the errata.patch file.

We have to decide how we'd like to handle this situation. We can:

1. drop the handling of all eclipsed errata annotation files
2. resurrect the content of the errata.patch file
3. drop the warnings for annotations which are eclipsed
4. do something else

[reschke]

2. does not work IMHO, it causes the updated errata annotations to say "based on outdated version"

3. works for me

4. works for me, too, as we're linking to the original erratum anyway

[mboe]

@reschke is your numbering correct (starts with 2)?

[reschke]

yes

[reschke]

@paulehoffman - would you be ok with just dropping the eclipsed errata (not having them in the HTML, hidden by CSS)? After all - we are linking to them anyway.

[paulehoffman]

Yes, it's OK to drop them.

[mboe]

@paulehoffman IMHO this ticket can be closed as soon as https://github.com/icann/rfc-annotations/pull/48 is merged