W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > March 2016

Re: Slack group?

From: Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 11:22:53 -0600
Message-ID: <CAJdbnOBiCkCVGe+TsC6=ZV-pm7k9gj0SVPoJ4+N3K2myE+L4pg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
Cc: Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
Yeha I dont want to introduce a new tool at this point.  We have IRC and we
have email.  We also have github and issues if that is a better way.

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
wrote:

> W3c process has an IPR statement.
>
> Does it breach that?
>
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 at 3:17 AM, Christopher Allan Webber <
> cwebber@dustycloud.org> wrote:
>
>> Timothy Holborn writes:
>>
>> > Hi Manu,
>> >
>> > Given the short timeframes, et.al. I'm pondering whether we should get
>> a
>> > slack group up and running...
>> >
>> >
>> > Slack is a bit more user friendly than the traditional irc approach. If
>> > it's helpful. Happy to manage it via the webcivics slack instance
>> running
>> > already, yet equally happy to participate and/or help with a new
>> instance.
>> >
>> > I have diagrams n such I've been developing. Perhaps a GitHub repo
>> might be
>> > the final destination or indeed a more effectively organised Google
>> drive
>> > for Work in progress.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > Tim.
>>
>> Please don't use Slack... I won't use it.  Their terms of service are
>> fairly scary, as I've had it explained to me from someone who did
>> in-depth research, and it's a non-standard, centralized approach to
>> communication which requires proprietary software.
>>
>


-- 
Shane McCarron
Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2016 17:23:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 3 March 2016 17:23:26 UTC