Re: A new GitHub organization for web-platform-tests

I don't think there's a reason to link together the proposal to move to
an independent Github organization (which seems to have rough consensus
already), and your (rather more vague) proposal.

HTH
Ms2ger

On 03/04/18 18:22, Mike Pennisi wrote:
> One aspect of WPT that I know maintainers have long resigned themselves
> to is
> the directory structure. The project defines test material at the top level,
> right alongside metadata, documentation, and infrastructure code. This
> makes it
> difficult for folks to orient themselves. It also increases the
> complexity of
> tooling since it must special-case certain files and folders when
> discovering
> tests.
> 
> I think James is right that GitHub will smooth the transition for basic
> fetch/push operations. But to the extent that some intervention is required,
> this could be a good opportunity to ask consumers to also accommodate an
> improvement to the project structure. That's easy for me to say, though, I'm
> not a consumer. If this is too much churn, I'd love to hear that feedback
> rather than just politely assume as much.
> 
> Philip: do you see the value in such a change? While you're conferring with
> folks about renaming the repository, would you mind also asking about this?
> 
> 
> On 04/03/2018 06:39 AM, James Graham wrote:
>> On 03/04/2018 10:47, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
>>> Sounds like there aren't any obvious org names that are better than
>>> https://github.com/web-platform-tests, so let's say that plan A is
>>> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt.
>>>
>>> The rename itself is easy and making sure that things don't break in the
>>> browser repos that import/export WPT is the hard part. I'll ask around
>>> about what needs to be done in advance, come up with a transition
>>> plan, and
>>> then send it out to this list for review.
>>
>>
>> I think as long as we move the repository in the GitHub UI GitHub sets
>> ups redirects, so I'm mildly confident it will work without any
>> changes. There could be some issues around hooks, and permissions, and
>> so on that I haven't considered, however.
>>
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2018 06:48:20 UTC