Re: [sysreq #8144] Re: Touch Events CG needs write access to hg/webevents/ repo

+Mike


On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Arthur Barstow via RT <sysreq@w3.org>
wrote:

> On 5/30/14 9:27 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> > I don't have the context here but, unless Doug tells me that I'm
> > mistaken, we don't provide access to hg to the CGs. This is simply not
> > part of the services we're willing to provide. Can the work be done on
> > github instead? What would be the harm in doing so?
>
> This CG is creating errata for the Touch Events REC (and perhaps an
> Edited Recommendation) as well as updates for the Touch Events Extension
> Note. We expect people to continue to use the HG location of these two
> docs as the place to find the latest version of the spec. It seems
> sub-optimal to have to create a new WG to do the above, thus the path of
> least resistance is to allow the CG to reuse the document repo it used
> while it was a WG.
>
> I suppose Github plus some redirection could be used instead, provided
> the history can be copied.
>
> -Art
>
>
> >
> > Philippe
> >
> > On Fri, 2014-05-30 at 06:45 -0400, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> The Touch Events CG wants to do follow-up work on documents published by
> >> the now-closed Web Events WG. The Web Events WG used the hg/webevents/
> >> repo and it *appears* that directory is not writeable by members of the
> >> CG that need write access.
> >>
> >> Please set the permissions of the hg/webevents/ repo so that everyone in
> >> the Touch Events CG can write to that repo.
> >>
> >> -Thanks, Art
> >>
> >> -------- Original Message --------
> >> Subject:     Re: Should touchmove really always be synchronous and
> >> cancellable?
> >> Date:        Thu, 29 May 2014 12:53:50 -0400
> >> From:        Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
> >> To:  Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
> >> CC:  public-touchevents@w3.org <public-touchevents@w3.org>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/29/14 10:01 AM, Rick Byers wrote:
> >>> I've followed Anne's instructions
> >>> <http://annevankesteren.nl/2010/08/w3c-mercurial> for setting up
> >>> mercurial for w3c, but whenever I try to push I get:
> >>>
> >>> pushing to https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents
> >>> searching for changes
> >>> 1 changesets found
> >>> abort: authorization failed
> >>>
> >>> I've verified that the username/password I have in ~/.hgrc works at
> >>> http://www.w3.org/users/myprofile, and in --debug output hg does
> >>> appear to be trying to authenticate with this username and password.
> >>> Does my account perhaps need to be marked as having mercurial push
> rights?
> >> I suspect the problem is the write access rights for each hg directory
> >> is on a per group basis and since the Web Events WG was closed, probably
> >> no one except perhaps W3C staff can now modify the directory.
> >>
> >> Doug - would you please look into this and make sure all members of the
> >> CG can have access rights to hg/webevents/?
> >>
> >>
> >>> I've made a branch from 'v1' called 'v1-errata', set the status back
> >>> to 'ED', updated the pub date and replaced the list reference from
> >>> public-webevents to public-touchevents. All sound ok?
> >> That all sounds fine to me.
> >>
> >> -AB
> >>
> >>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Rick
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com
> >>> <mailto:rbyers@google.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>      Ok, I'll start looking into how to make an update with hg (I'll
> >>>      start with the simpler change in the other thread - fractional
> >>>      touch co-ordinates). Jacob if you've got any notes/advice to get
> >>>      me started that would be great!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>      On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Jacob Rossi
> >>>      <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com <mailto:Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>          In addition to Art’s point about the Principle of Least
> Surprise….
> >>>
> >>>          While I prefer git to hg, my preference here is to keep it in
> >>>          hg so you can still diff against arbitrary editions past or
> >>>          present. We could also create an errata branch to separate
> things.
> >>>
> >>>          A W3C account is all that you need (technically, not
> >>>          procedurally) to start publishing. Rick, if you’re
> >>>          volunteering to do the editing then I can help you get the
> >>>          environment set up.
> >>>
> >>>          -Jacob
> >>>
> >>>          *From:*Sangwhan Moon [mailto:smoon@opera.com
> >>>          <mailto:smoon@opera.com>]
> >>>          *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 5:16 AM
> >>>          *To:* Arthur Barstow
> >>>          *Cc:* Rick Byers; Doug Schepers; public-touchevents@w3.org
> >>>          <mailto:public-touchevents@w3.org>
> >>>          *Subject:* Re: Should touchmove really always be synchronous
> >>>          and cancellable?
> >>>
> >>>          On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Arthur Barstow
> >>>          <art.barstow@gmail.com <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>              On 5/15/14 10:47 AM, Rick Byers wrote:
> >>>
> >>>                  I can also make proposed edits via GitHub if that's
> >>>                  better...
> >>>
> >>>              I think the PrincipleOfLeastSurprise suggests people would
> >>>              expect to find the latest ED of the spec where the Web
> >>>              Events WG last worked on it i.e.
> >>>              <
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/v1/touchevents.html>.
> >>>              Would you please clone that repo, try to push an update
> >>>              and let us know the results?
> >>>
> >>>          If we are to do this, then I think the respec meta data should
> >>>          probably be rolled back so it doesn't show the document status
> >>>          as rec to avoid confusion.
> >>>
> >>>          (This mixed top and bottom posting is hard to follow...)
> >>>
> >>>                  On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Arthur Barstow
> >>>                  <art.barstow@gmail.com <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com>
> >>>                  <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com
> >>>                  <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>                  On 5/9/14 11:48 AM, Rick Byers wrote:
> >>>
> >>>                  So should I just propose the exact text of the change
> >>>                  here in
> >>>                  e-mail and leave the doc work to you Doug (which the
> >>>                  community
> >>>                  could then review)? Or is there some system for me to
> >>>                  directly do the doc work, even though it'll be
> >>>                  published by
> >>>                  W3C staff?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>                  I don't have a strong preference for you sending
> >>>                  proposal(s) to
> >>>                  the list vs. you updating the ED (although it seems
> like a
> >>>                  changeset/diff would be easier for reviewers,
> >>>                  especially if the
> >>>                  proposal affects more than one part of the spec).
> >>>
> >>>                  Doug?
> >>>
> >>>                  -AB
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>          --
> >>>          Sangwhan Moon [Opera Software ASA]
> >>>          Software Engineer | Tokyo, Japan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 30 May 2014 14:18:08 UTC