W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > January 2017

Re: Moving the process to github…

From: Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 17:08:21 -0500
Message-ID: <1483567701.2538.50.camel@w3.org>
To: chaals@yandex-team.ru, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>, Coralie Mercier <coralie@w3.org>, Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
On Thu, 2016-12-29 at 11:44 +0100, chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:
> Our drafts are currently on W3C infrastructure. I think it would be
> helpful if we can republish easily on w3.org - not /TR since the
> process isn't a tech specification. Ted?

People are doing that a few different ways at present. Short version it
is plausible and we may try to come up with a better unified method of
doing so. I can help with specifics for process draft at a www.w3.org U
RI.

> >    b) A public, archived W3C mailing list which historically has,
> >       and can continue to, accept feedback
> 
> We have that too.
> 
> >    c) A public, archived W3C mailing list archiving all GitHub
> discussions
> 
> I think that would be a useful thing for backup.
> 
> >    d) A read-write mercurial mirror of the git repos on
> hg.csswg.org
> 
> Hmm. Was that hard to set up? If we could match that on the current
> dvcs.w3.org repo we would have a continuous history…

Most have decommissioned their mercurial repo when they move to github
(with a redirect) and I think that is the preferred practice. In fact
we would like to retire dvcs.w3.org or rather mercurial and perhaps
have dvcs.w3.org a live checkout of master (or gh-pages) branch of all
github.com/w3c repos but this is a bigger picture item beyond this
discussion.

-- 
Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
W3C Systems Team
http://www.w3.org


Received on Wednesday, 4 January 2017 22:08:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 4 January 2017 22:08:34 UTC