W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: [Audio WG] Move to GitHub?

From: Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:17:27 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJhzemUDQA8VefiC-susUuwsLfhLtDiXK9dyX9M3OrSp-wTJ6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>, "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 26 Dec 2012, at 20:45, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
>
> Of course, this does mean we lose having a consistently-updated public
> editor's draft that is directly navigable (i.e.
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/midi/specification.html).
>  Should we upload occasional editor drafts there?
>
>
> Using a gh-pages branch on GH can serve the same purpose as it provides a
> stable link.
>
> That avoids duplication of docs on hg and GH and should keep everyone
> happy. It's a kinda similar model to what the HTMLWG uses with their "HTML
> Nightly" builds.
>

Actually, in the README there's a link to the consistently updated preview
of the latest master document. No need for gh-pages or anything. This
should serve the same purpose and I think we should change the HG document
to a page that says that the latest editor's draft has moved to the new URL.

Cheers,
Jussi


>
>
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
>
>> OK.  I'm going to attack a few of our bugs today, so I'll work in there.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Jussi Kalliokoski <
>> jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm generally okay either way - I'd be happy to dump Mercurial, since
>>>> this is the only project I use Hg for, and am much more comfortable using
>>>> Github - although the issues are a lot less powerful, I don't think we
>>>> necessarily need that power for this project.  Obviously, I'd want it in an
>>>> organization that the editors can check directly into.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Like said, Marcos already created such an org and you're a member in it.
>>> :) Also, I just converted our Hg repo to git and cherry-picked the Web MIDI
>>> API spec, so I have created a repo to the WebAudio org, preserving the
>>> history of the Web MIDI spec, but nothing else:
>>> https://github.com/WebAudio/web-midi-api
>>>
>>> The issues are still disabled, I'll use my script as soon as we decide
>>> on this and manage to lock the Bugzilla.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jussi
>>>
>>>
>>>> That said, 1) we'd need to lock the Bugzilla, or keep it synced, 2) I'm
>>>> not sure if Chris would want to do this for the web audio spec or not.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, 25 December 2012 at 21:59, Jussi Kalliokoski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Jussi Kalliokoski <
>>>>> jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com (mailto:jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com)>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > > Hey guys,
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Merry Christmas and stuff!
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Marcos Caceres suggested [1] that we move our projects to GitHub.
>>>>> Personally I think this would make things a lot easier, having simple pull
>>>>> requests, a nicer issue tracker, being able to simply cross-reference
>>>>> commits from issues and vice versa, etc.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > What does everyone think? Are there some potential problems with
>>>>> this? I know that moving the existing issues to GitHub would be a pain, but
>>>>> perhaps we can think of a nice script to do this for us.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Anyway, Marcos has already created an organization for us on
>>>>> GitHub [2], in case we want to do this.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > FWIW, as a Christmas gift to you guys, I wrote a script that exports
>>>>> Bugzilla issues over to GitHub [1] (as well as a RESTful API wrapper for
>>>>> Bugzilla, hahah).
>>>>> Awesomeness!
>>>>> > To test it, I applied it to the Web MIDI API issues, which were
>>>>> added to my GH repo called webmidi-issues [2], you can check it out to see
>>>>> whether you think the export quality is satisfactory.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks good to me… just a few minor things like things in "[…]" getting
>>>>> turned into links, but no big deal.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > [1] https://gist.github.com/4375613
>>>>> > [2] https://github.com/jussi-kalliokoski/webmidi-issues/issues
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Cheers,
>>>>> > Jussi
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > Cheers,
>>>>> > > Jussi
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > [1]
>>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012OctDec/0778.html
>>>>> > > [2] https://github.com/WebAudio
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 26 December 2012 21:18:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:04 UTC