W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > May 2018

RE: Organizing GitHub issues, projects and milestones for work on Profiles

From: Svensson, Lars <L.Svensson@dnb.de>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 06:55:08 +0000
To: "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8d9e1391c39e4df8912c8fbe5f74d0c7@dnb.de>
On Friday, May 11, 2018 9:26 AM, Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net] wrote:

> Antoine, we already have profile negotiation as a deliverable, and the
> advice from Lars is that the deliverable would depend on a very limited
> requirement that the profile have a IRI. I suspect that we need,
> however, to look at that again in light of profileDesc - in the sense of
> it isn't clear to me if the IRI in question is for the profile or the
> profileDesc. So there is going to be a teasing out of relationships
> between profile negotiation and profileDesc.

In my world it's the IRI of the profile, not of the profileDesc (just as we usually refer to entities and not just to their descriptions).

> Note that the current editors draft for the Guidance document has the
> editors listing that should be on the Negotiation document. It would be
> good to set up the separate projects, and we need a new draft document
> for negotiation. Where we slot in profileDesc - whether in Guidance or a
> separate document - seems to still be an open question.
> 
> Are you familiar enough with Respec to at least get the document folders
> set up and the negotiation editors moved to the correct document? Or is
> there someone reading this who will volunteer for that? (Since you are
> on vacation.)

If we can agree on a name for the folder of the negotiation document ('profile-negotiation'?) I can take care of moving the current negotiation-centric files to that document. If I need W3C guidance I can probably refer to Iván Hermann whom I'm likely to meet tomorrow.

Best,

Lars
 
> On 5/9/18 3:15 PM, Antoine Isaac wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Following today's discussion on the profile work [6] and my action on
> > labels [7] I would like to come back to Simon's suggestions from the
> > thread below, so that we can set up our space for working on all
> > profiles deliverables.
> >
> > Simon has suggested to create Github projects [4] for each deliverable
> > and I agree with him. What I can do is create one project for each of
> > the deliverables we envision in relation with profiles:
> > - profile negotiation
> > - profile guidance
> > - profile description vocabulary
> >
> > The next step would be to check the content of a current project
> > "Guidance for Application Profiles for Dataset Exchange" [8] and see how
> > to distribute its content onto the three new projects. It seems that
> > this project gathers issues that are related to all three deliverables.
> >
> > @Simon, would it sound ok? Is it something we could try to do together?
> >
> > The next step would be to see whether we need to organize further our
> > work with Github milestones [2]. I have created 3 of them for the FPWDs
> > of the profile deliverables [9]. These are currently empty, and I
> > hesitate to fill them until the group agrees we need them.
> > As a matter of fact Simon has already created milestones at [2] and I
> > don't know what they correspond to. They don't have due dates, and look
> > rather like aspects of deliverables. Simon himself said they hadn't
> > helped much. Should we delete them, in the light of coming Github
> > projects and possibly new milestones with due dates [9]?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Antoine
> >
> > [6] https://www.w3.org/2018/05/09-dxwg-minutes#item01,

> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/15OfNXU9AJ-cZysc7uYP-

> Gks5dDa8n2B5IN6rWa3kRpo/
> >
> > [7] https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/109

> > [8] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/projects/2

> > [9] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestone/9,

> > https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestone/10,

> > https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestone/11

> >
> >
> > On 27/04/18 02:25, Rob Atkinson wrote:
> >> Hi - have been using Git projects in the OGC work I'm doing to help
> >> organise and visualise at lerast some minimal sense of priortisation.
> >> Kanban doesnt really help you much with dependencies - unless you
> >> create a column explicitly for "waiting on other issues to unblock"
> >>
> >> You can have issues appearing in multiple projects - so that seems
> >> OK.  Its not a high overhead and does give a visual feel, so it at
> >> least will help the coordinators with prioritisation I feel.
> >>
> >> Rob
> >>
> >>
> >> On 27 April 2018 at 08:52, <Simon.Cox@csiro.au
> >> <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     I fear the labels' horse has bolted.
> >>     Earlier this week I deleted all the unused labels (about 10) but
> >> there are still a lot. Labels, like tags, are primarily for recall.
> >>
> >>     Perhaps use of milestones for precise grouping? I made up a few,
> >> but so far they mostly reflect my biases, plus observations of some
> >> hot topics.
> >>
> >>     -----Original Message-----
> >>     From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net
> >> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>]
> >>     Sent: Thursday, 26 April, 2018 01:55
> >>     To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
> >>     Subject: Re: Organizing the issues - GitHub Projects?
> >>
> >>     Regardless of whether we opt to use projects, would there be an
> >> advantage to making stricter use of the labels? Or creating labels
> >> that are only used to identify deliverables? It seems to me that the
> >> labels we have are being used pretty loosely, which is good for recall
> >> but less so for precision. A few precise labels might help with the
> >> organizing?
> >>
> >>     kc
> >>
> >>     On 4/24/18 7:43 PM, Simon.Cox@csiro.au wrote:
> >>      > The list of issues on our GitHub is getting quite overwhelming
> >> [1].
> >>      >
> >>      > A few weeks ago I proposed that we make some groupings using
> >> GitHub's
> >>      > Milestones and set up a few [2] but this doesn't appear to have
> >> helped
> >>      > much.
> >>      >
> >>      > Effectively the Milestones are just a kind of glorified tag
> >> (label).
> >>      >
> >>      > And we definitely have too many tags (labels) [3].
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      > So, here's another suggestion: create a GitHub Project for each
> >>      > deliverable [4].
> >>      >
> >>      > GitHub "Projects" provides a rudimentary Kanban board for each
> >>      > project, allowing issues to be sorted in status ("todo", "in
> >> progress", "done") [5].
> >>      >
> >>      > It seems to correspond pretty well with deliverables, and at least
> >>      > will allow us to look at the issues associated with the separate
> >>      > deliverables more cleanly.
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      > Any comments?
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      > [1] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues

> >> <https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues>
> >>      >
> >>      > [2] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestones

> >> <https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestones>
> >>      >
> >>      > [3] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels

> >> <https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels>
> >>      >
> >>      > [4] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/projects

> >> <https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/projects>
> >>      >
> >>      > [5] https://help.github.com/articles/about-project-boards/

> >> <https://help.github.com/articles/about-project-boards/>
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      > *Simon J D Cox *
> >>      >
> >>      > Research Scientist - Environmental Informatics
> >>      >
> >>      > Team Leader - Environmental Information Infrastructure
> >>      >
> >>      > CSIRO Land and Water <http://www.csiro.au/Research/LWF

> >> <http://www.csiro.au/Research/LWF>>
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net

> m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2018 06:55:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 25 March 2019 10:33:23 UTC