W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: [IndexedDB] Status

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 15:25:24 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTilxSwuLaQD94yF7HRYwIo5jzPLfbvKWwPBm9vtE@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
Cc: Nikunj Mehta <nikunj@o-micron.com>, Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>, public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Nikunj Mehta <nikunj@o-micron.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 12:22 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>>> 3. Editors: Nikunj Mehta (Invited Expert), Eliot Graf (Microsoft)
>>> 4. Spec document management: Currently W3C CVS, also using W3C's
>>> Distributed CVS (Mercurial) system
>> The current spec is really far out of date at this point.  There are 15
>> issues logged, but I could easily log another 15 (if I thought that'd help
>> get things resolved more quickly).
>> I know Eliot is helping out with copy editing, but it's going to take a lot
>> of time to get the spec to where it needs to be.  Andrei P (of GeoLocation
>> spec fame) has been working on implementing IndexedDB in Chrome for a couple
>> weeks now and has volunteered to start updating the spec right away.  He
>> already has CVS access.  Is there any reason for him not to start working
>> through the bug list?
>> As Eliot is working on non-design issues, it is easier to coordinate with
>> him. Moreover, I am not totally sure how the DCVS system we have started to
>> use just now is going to work out. Give us another week or so to sort out
>> initial hiccups and at that point we could use more editorial help.
>> Multiple people changing the spec's technical basis makes it necessary to
>> create a more sophisticated process. I am happy to add Andrei as an editor
>> provided I can understand the editing process and how we get new editor's
>> drafts out without necessarily being out of sync with each other.
>> Andrei -- would you be able to describe how you would co-ordinate the
>> editing with me?
> I only plan to make changes once we have consensus on the mailing
> list. It's probably easiest to use the issue tracker to distribute the
> existing bugs among the three editors. If we find that over time the
> distribution becomes unbalanced, we can discuss offline about how to
> improve the collaboration, but I don't think that is a big worry at
> this point.

A few comments in random order.

If switching to a different VCS is holding us back, then I think that
the priority should be to work on the technical contents of the spec,
not switching VCS. Having worked with CVS I can say that while
ceratinly not ideal, it definitely works for distributed development
in a pinch. And we are in a pinch. As long as we all coordinate on the
mailing list I don't see that using CVS would be a blocker.

Like Jeremy, I could easily file 15 other bugs in bugzilla if that
helps things move along. So far we've been very blocked on getting a
decision on the big overhaul of the async API that we have proposed
(for what it's worth, I expect to submit a similarly big overhaul for
the synchronous API). I'll start filing bugs on the issues I have
brought up in a short order (tomorrow latest).

I'm not sure what the conclusion "no significant changes expected" for
versioning is based on. Last we talked about this we all seemed to be
in pretty big disagreement. In fact my impression was that there was
more agreement on solutions that were different from the current draft
than what the current draft says.

If it'd help I'd be happy to open up our google doc for more editors.
That way we can get some basics drafted without being blocked on
adding the formalia needed in the actual spec.

/ Jonas
Received on Monday, 7 June 2010 22:31:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:25 UTC