W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > July to September 2016

Re: Relaxing mailing list requirement

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:41:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBmabUyN1AQvNsg7zZbTxZM0GK5i8jYnPKiYh_4RBdgKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Cc: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, Denis Ah-Kang <denis@w3.org>, spec-prod <spec-prod@w3.org>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 6:54 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org> wrote:
> On 08/19/2016 02:30 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>> As a community, we've increasingly shifted away from gathering
>> spec-related feedback via mailing lists. Unfortunately, PubRules still
>> requires us to include a link to a mailing list in the boilerplate of
>> a spec.
> Looking at
> https://github.com/w3c/specberus/blob/master/lib/rules/sotd/mailing-list.js
> I see that it can certainly be improved since, while it's asking for GitHub
> or a mailing list in the SOTD, it still requires an email archive link (and
> I note that we're not requiring https there :/).

The email archive link is intentional and should be preserved.  While
I love using GitHub as our issue tracker, it's not appropriate to rely
on GitHub the company as our history-maintainer.  Setting up a mailing
list that receives all GH Issues mail (or just repurposing the groups
main list for that purpose) is easy.

For actual collab, tho, Specberus allows either a mailing list *or* a
GH Issues link, as you note.

Received on Friday, 19 August 2016 18:41:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 19 August 2016 18:41:59 UTC