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

RE: [General] domconftest now a project at SourceForge - Members

From: Arnold, Curt <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:08:40 -0600
Message-ID: <70E215722F6AD511820A000103D141D40AA3FD@thor.aeathtl.com>
To: "'www-dom-ts@w3.org'" <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
Wasn't intended to be off-list.  Sorry.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dimitris Dimitriadis [mailto:dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se]
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 1:53 PM
> To: 'www-dom-ts@w3.org'
> Cc: xmlconf-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [General] domconftest now a project at SourceForge - Members
> 
> 
> 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).

The current set should be fine.  I think most of the others were more
involved in XML conformance testing and it would not be difficult to 
add them if they express an interest.

> 
> /Dimitris
> 
> -----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?

I think that is probably the best approach.

> 
> 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.

I thought it was since it might be difficult to add non-W3C members
as committers since it might open up the entire W3C CVS system.
I has assumed the primary reason HTML Tidy moved to 
SourceForge was to allow non-W3C members to participate without
compromising the W3C CVS.

> 
> In any case, I'm happy either way.
> 
> /Dimitris
> 
> -----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 15:12:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 April 2009 12:58:44 GMT