W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-csv-wg@w3.org > February 2014

Re: ISSUE management

From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:25:41 +0000
Message-ID: <53071B95.1030906@apache.org>
To: Alfredo Serafini <seralf@gmail.com>
CC: CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
On 19/02/14 09:12, Alfredo Serafini wrote:
> Hi Andy, if you plan to mantain some source/documentation on github,
> that issue management it's really good, widely used, and permits also
> the usage of the @username reference, which may be used for discussing
> specific technical elements inline, as a sort of inline topic for every
> issue.
> Alfredo


Yes, for the documents on github, that's the way I presume we're doing 
it and this was confirmed in the call.  It works well for matters about 
a document where the editor can close the issue when done.

But what about issues that are not specific to a document (at the moment)?

In other WG, are proposed, refined before being accepted by the WG as 
"issues" and it is WG resolutions that close that kind of issue.  That's 
a different a different kind of issue.



> 2014-02-19 10:00 GMT+01:00 Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org
> <mailto:andy@apache.org>>:
>     On 05/02/14 13:17, CSV on the Web Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>         ISSUE-1: There is no machine-readable mechanism available to
>         describe how the set of files are related
>         http://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/__track/issues/1
>         <http://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/track/issues/1>
>         Raised by:
>         On product:
>     I was going to try to extract some points from recent email
>     discussions and convert into possible issues.
>     How are we gathering issues? Are we using that mechanism just yet?
>     Which tracker? W3C or github?
>     (The W3C one is linked from the home page.  ISSUE-1 there is closed.)
>              Andy
Received on Friday, 21 February 2014 09:26:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:21:38 UTC