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: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:05:14 +0100
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Cc: "public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <55C3DCFC7683499C9CA5C24996A778E1@marcosc.com>



On Wednesday, 15 August 2012 at 12:36, Robin Berjon wrote:

> > 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.
> 
> 
> 
> The CLA part is important and does indeed need to be changed. But the WebApps testing process is IMHO too heavy, and leads to bad directory structures.
This was my feeling as well, but was not sure how others felt about it.  
> I think we should drop the submitted/approved structure and move to commit-then-review, with branches.

Agreed. This would follow a more traditional dev model (and make use of GIT's actual purpose/features :) ).
> I would recommend git flow for this. People propose tests to feature/*. The branch that most people are interested in is development. Whenever we need to snapshot things, to put a seal of approval from the group on the suite, to make an official release with results, or whatever, we merge to master and tag it.

Sounds good to me. 
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2012 13:05:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 15 August 2012 13:05:43 GMT