W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Proposal: moving tests to GitHub

From: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:14:43 +0000
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
CC: Odin HÝrthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <F9981AFB970564408FEB7DFCF62D440843701F1C@PRN-MBX01-4.TheFacebook.com>
On 1/22/13 4:45 PM, "Robin Berjon" <robin@w3.org> wrote:

>On 22/01/2013 14:48 , Tobie Langel wrote:
>> Yes, I guess what I want to avoid at all costs is the split per WG which
>> has boundaries that partially happen at IP level, rather than strictly
>>at
>> the technology level.
>
>My understanding is that we don't have to care about spec-IP issues in
>test suites because when you contribute to a test suite you're not
>contributing to the spec's essential claims.

That's correct.

>You *do* need to make the proper commitments for the test suite, but
>those are much lighter and can easily be extended to all.

Moving to GitHub should be an excellent occasion to revisit how the CLA
works and provide better integration, e.g.: by using something like
CLAHub[1].

>That's why we're proposing to ditch per-WG anything here. The way
>html-testsuite is set up, we already have subdirectories for html,
>canvas2d, and microdata. Those are all from the HTML WG, but they're
>just listed as the individual specs. We can keep on adding more specs in
>there (the Web Crypto people are looking to do that).

That sounds good to me. It's the per WG siloing I'm opposed to, not the
one repository to rule them all idea.

--tobie

---
[1]: https://github.com/jasonm/clahub
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2013 16:15:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:57 GMT