W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Moving Ambient Light Tests, Re: Agenda - Distributed Meeting 15 August 2012

From: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:57:59 +0000
To: "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CC509E54.19722%tobie@fb.com>
On 8/14/12 11:16 PM, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

>Hi Tobie,
>A few questions about moving tests to Github...
>
>On Tuesday, 14 August 2012 at 22:39, Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com wrote:
>>  
>> "Ambient light events" FPWD published,
>>http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-ambient-light-20120802/
>>  
>> Discussion of moving tests to Github, comments to
>>public-test-infra@w3.org,
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2012Aug/0021.html
>I strongly support moving tests to Github, but would insist that test
>suites be mirrored at the W3C for longevity/authority (I love Github, but
>have also seen many of these kinds of awesome companies come and go over
>the years).

Absolutely.

>Also, how do we co-ordinate this? Is the W3C Github account or project
>already set up? Or do individuals just control their own repos and just
>link to them from the specs (obviously, I don't see that working well
>personally to help build communityŠ unless someone already popular does
>it)?

I think the best option would be to have projects hosted under the
umbrella of the W3C (github) organization, so they would all sit at
github.com/w3c. W3C staff would be able to create Github teams with R+W
access to specific repos. Repos would all be public so everyone would have
read access.

How repos are organized and/or name is probably best left to individual
groups to figure out, though I think matching w3.org/TR/ could prove
invaluable.

>Another question: would the existing Web Apps test suite creation process
>[1] work for a general community in the wild, or is it too process heavy?
>How do you invasion test contributions will work (i.e., shared
>project/contributors, integration control into main test branch,
>code/test quality control/guidelines, etc.)?

I don't think much of it would need to change. Inclusion of new test case
in the test suite could be done through pull requests, burdening the
puller (a member of the team with r+w access to the repo) to verify that
the requester has signed the CLA. In practice a high number of
contributions come from a small number of contributors, which considerably
lightens this burden. Node.js, which is the second most followed
repository on github[1], and the seventh most forked one[2], handles this
process manually; I've yet to hear complains about it.

>Really interested to hear how all this could work!
>
>Marcos 

--tobie
 
---
[1]: https://github.com/popular/starred
[2]: https://github.com/popular/forked
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2012 23:58:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 14 August 2012 23:58:26 GMT