W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-music-notation@w3.org > May 2019

Co-chair Meeting Minutes: May 1, 2019 [via Music Notation Community Group]

From: W3C Community Development Team <team-community-process@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 17:22:22 +0000
To: public-music-notation@w3.org
Message-ID: <2afc25002b914163f570861cfab5c79e@www.w3.org>
GitHub infrastructure



Following some confusion with pull requests on the MNX repository, Adrian has been discussing with Joe how we should handle the branches on the MNX repository. Joe originally set up a Travis CI job on the master branch to automatically run Bikeshed on the files and push the changes to the gh-pages branch automatically. Joe suggested that we maintain his automatic process until Adrian can set up a corresponding set of automated steps for his own GitHub user. The issue is complicated by a new release of Travis CI since the time Joe originally set things up on GitHub. Adrian is in touch with GitHub and Travis CI about this. 



The upshot is: all MNX commits, pull requests, etc. should be made on master, and these will all be automatically moved to gh-pages.



Adrian plans to write a CONTRIBUTING Markdown readme to add to the MNX repository. Once this is done, we will add corresponding versions of this file to the other two repositories.



Note that in the MusicXML and SMuFL repositories, commits are currently made on the gh-pages branch because there are no automated travis-ci processes in place on those repositories.



Splitting MNX-Common and MNX-Generic



The reason Adrian has not yet split the MNX-Common and MNX-Generic specifications is that the automated GitHub process for deploying the specification is hardwired to produce a single Bikeshed-based specification. Once the infrastructure changes above are complete we'll get this split completed. Adrian has updated #98 to this effect.



Written vs. sounding pitch pull request



Adrian merged pull request #148 and the co-chairs discussed the process for reviewing pull requests. We reaffirmed that there is no specific time window for reviewing pull requests, and the co-chairs assume that if there is no dissent from members of the CG within a few days of the pull request being proposed, this will be taken as assent and the pull request will be merged.



Octave lines and sounding pitch



Adrian requested that Michael and Daniel review pull request #152 so that the co-chairs can come to a consensus on how or whether octave lines affect sounding pitch. Adrian has closed issue #4, but Michael suggested that we might consider reopening #4 until pull request #152 is settled.



Participation of co-chairs in issue discussion



One member of the community group contacted the co-chairs privately expressing frustration that proposed pull requests went unreviewed and uncommented by the co-chairs for an extended period of time. The co-chairs agreed that we need to do a better job of keeping on top of the comment threads in issues and review pull requests in a more timely fashion.



Realizations and layouts issue



Michael reminded Adrian that following our meeting at Musikmesse a few weeks ago, the plan is to close issue #138, but not until moving or referencing the comments into other relevant issues. Adrian agreed to undertake this so that issue #138 can be closed.



The next co-chair meeting will be on 14 May 2019.



----------

This post sent on Music Notation Community Group



'Co-chair Meeting Minutes: May 1, 2019'

https://www.w3.org/community/music-notation/2019/05/01/co-chair-meeting-minutes-may-1-2019/



Learn more about the Music Notation Community Group: 

https://www.w3.org/community/music-notation
Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2019 17:22:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 1 May 2019 17:22:26 UTC