- From: Aleksandar Stojiljkovic via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:48:33 +0000
- To: public-media-capture-logs@w3.org
@huningxin, @robman, @anssiko >But I understand that we still have some opens in #110 and #135. #135: I don't see there is anything open in #135. All the comments and reporter confirm that this needs to be fixed and the PR here is a fix for it. in [comment here](https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-depth/issues/135#issuecomment-260585403) @robman expresses agreement with my approach coded here in this PR. #110, The only open there is @robman's [proposal](https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-depth/issues/110#issuecomment-260587927) about which part of this PR should be v1 and which should be v2 scope. You also raised the [question](https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-depth/issues/110#issuecomment-260875248) here about why to attempt to provide incomplete data only. I don't think that PR should matter about v1/v2 scope split. Or in PR only we should put content that all the participants in issue page agree should be v1 and delete all v2 scope content? -- GitHub Notification of comment by astojilj Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-depth/pull/144#issuecomment-262493547 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2016 11:48:39 UTC