Re: ISSUE management

On 21 Feb 2014 01:26, "Andy Seaborne" <andy@apache.org> wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
> 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.
>
> Chairs?

I believe we said we'd try GitHub for everything, and see how that goes.

Dan (possibly misremembering)

>         Andy
>
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>