Update pull_request_template.md to ask for related issue or PR numbers

[dnsguru]

Added request for submitting party to include historic Issue # or PR # to address issue #1027

• Description of Organization

• Reason for PSL Inclusion

• DNS verification via dig

• Run Syntax Checker (make test)

• Each domain listed in the PRIVATE section has and shall maintain at least two years remaining on registration.

Description of Organization

Organization Website:

Reason for PSL Inclusion

DNS Verification via dig

make test

[dnsguru]

Fast-follow to #1109 in order to address #1027 (request for submitters to include historic Issue/PR)

[fsodic]

@sleevi & @dnsguru
I completely disagree. Because it means we have to register the domain for the next 2 years which may add to the costs that are incurred for 1 year of financial statements if from an organization that already has a legal entity.
It might seem okay if the organization is large.
But think again if these organizations only target the local market in their respective countries.
So I think it makes more sense when the domain registered is at least 2 years old from the date of the PR request and not 2 years left since the PR request.
So we know whether the domain is well controlled and not all domains can immediately ask for PR for this publicsuffix.

[dnsguru]

The discussion was really amongst the core maintainers on how to address the change as it is part of addressing expired or expiring names as a general rule and not punitive response to the PR that included the expired names. That was more a catalyst to take a long-deferred action which was to add the renewal term requirements. The disagreement is noted. It is understandable to seek to save money, but the renewal terms serve to keep things efficient and protect the submitting party while maintaining the integrity of this list. If a name cannot be maintained with ample registration term, it really does not belong on the list and should not get submitted. What we often face is that submissions are 'set and forget' until a change is needed from the submitting party, but mostly folks get what they want and leave, and this causes some debris to clean up when renewals don't occur. Renewal expenses are what they are, and dodging the costs of maintaining the submitted names pushes burden onto the volunteers of this project to address the issues of expired names being on the list. The objective is to maintain quality and reliable listings and resourcing is such that dealing with expired names (especially in new submissions) wastes volunteer time. Volunteers are maintaining the public suffix list. Wasting their time is a cost as well, which should not be considered to have a value of zero. There is no entitlement to being listed that should be expected by any party seeking entries within the private section, and requests should be modest in nature and conform in respect of this being a voluntary global resource. We also see that the file size growing can introduce bandwidth and scaling issues, which modesty of requests can help, but also housekeeping of old records will aid in addressing. Because the volunteer time gets wasted removing expired names or watching for them, those maintaining the project candidly do not, but field reports from new registrants of names. Out of necessity we will at some point have some form of automation that reviews expiry dates and make removals of domains or sections. These will depend upon expiry horizons beyond at least a year, so the objective in entries having renewal obligations is really a safety net for the submitting party, so they know the potential consequences of non-renewal. The objective is to maintain a quality list, through modest, efficient means, and the renewal requirement aids in that objective.

…

On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 1:21 AM Fajar Sodik ***@***.***> wrote: @sleevi <https://github.com/sleevi> & @dnsguru <https://github.com/dnsguru> I completely disagree. Because it means we have to register the domain for the next 2 years which may add to the costs that are incurred for 1 year of financial statements if from an organization that already has a legal entity. It might seem okay if the organization is large. But think again if these organizations only target the local market in their respective countries. So I think it makes more sense when the domain registered is at least 2 years old from the date of the PR request and not 2 years left since the PR request. So we know whether the domain is well controlled and not all domains can immediately ask for PR for this publicsuffix. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1116 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJOMQMLTIKHTULZC43DSJVZCBANCNFSM4SHT5XZA> .

[fsodic]

#1111 my PR not response bro?

[dnsguru]

Had to answer all this other distraction stuff first... #lookingnow #volunteer #broke-a-f-due-to-pandemic #volunteeringcompeteswithpaidgigs

…

On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 3:37 PM Fajar Sodik ***@***.***> wrote: #1111 <#1111> my PR not response bro? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1116 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJKW6THLS65NYIJBXKLSJY5JHANCNFSM4SHT5XZA> .

[dnsguru]

@sleevi please approve and s/m