W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom-ts@w3.org > June 2001

[General] domconftest now a project at SourceForge - Members

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 20:52:46 +0200
Message-ID: <9F67DC27F4CCD311ABA600508B6A66A44A6A4F@VXOIMP1>
To: "'www-dom-ts@w3.org'" <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
Cc: xmlconf-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
Btw, forgot to ask:

Curt Arnold, David Brownell, Richard Tobin, Edwin Goei, Fred L. Drake, Jr.,
Joe Polastre, James Strachan. Mary Brady 

are listed as users of the xmlconf project. Is it safe to assume that all
want to be in the domconftest as well? (so far, there's Curt, David, Fred,
myself and Mary).


-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Dimitris Dimitriadis 
Skickat: den 28 juni 2001 20:42
Till: 'Arnold, Curt'
Ämne: SV: [General] domconftest now a project at SourceForge

Is this an offline posting?

In any case, I have no personal preference really. However, I'm not a W3C
employee, so I'm not at liberty to take decisions on how and where we'll
collaborate wrt. W3C machinery and policies, I'm just happy if we do.

What about letting the W3C submission list be the point of entry of tests,
then put everything on the SF and develop there, then put everything on W3C
machines once finalised?

As far as the W3C CVS being undesirable; I think the conlusion was (I just
scanned through the archives) that using a W3C bug-tracker was undesirable,
therefore we looked at SF. I don't think anyone's ever said that using the
W3C CVS as such is undesirable.

In any case, I'm happy either way.


-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Arnold, Curt [mailto:Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com]
Skickat: den 28 juni 2001 20:27
Till: 'Dimitris Dimitriadis'
Ämne: RE: [General] domconftest now a project at SourceForge

> I definitely agree. However, we've known for some time that 
> the primary
> place for browsing and downloading tests, transforms and 
> schems would be the
> W3C site. SF came into the question as an alternative to W3C as far as
> bug/issue tracking was concerned.
> I realise that keeping tests and other resources on two 
> different locations
> can be tedious, but it may be a price that we have to pay (especially
> myself, since I'm going to manually check in tests to SF if 
> there are issues
> about them).
> /Dimitris

We could use the SourceForge CVS as our collaborative workspace and publish
to the W3C site as appropriate.

Since most tests will need some sort of modification between submission and
final approval, they need to go into a CVS somewhere during this process.

I had inferred that using the W3C CVS was undesirable, thinking it was the
primary reason HTML Tidy moved to SourceForge.
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2001 14:53:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:03 UTC