W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > December 2001

Re: SourceForge and issues tracking

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:25:28 -0700
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20011220100424.03769610@rockynet.com>
To: Rob Lanphier <robla@real.com>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Rob,

Thanks for sending this:

At 02:28 PM 12/19/01 -0800, Rob Lanphier wrote:
>[...]
>If you'd like to look at an example of a project actively using 
>SourceForge for specification writing, look at the RTSP spec:
>
>http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=377744&group_id=23194&func=browse
>
>We've just started using it pretty heavily, and it's been very nice.

Questions/comments:

1. can only "Project Admins" initiate a new issue?
2. but it looks like apparently any "member" can "Add a Comment"
3. are there any export or serialized (external) formats?

#2 is a nice feature (like Bugzilla) that the XML/XSLT system (of DOM and 
Protocols) wouldn't share -- overall content and integrity of the system is 
controlled by Project Admins, but they don't have to edit/enter all 
comments and argumentation.   It could be sort of simulated in the XML/XSLT 
system, by putting the XML database in CVS and giving all members write 
access.  But without some work and development, it looks difficult to 
restrict the general access to just the comment/description fields.

Does anyone know whether or how Protocols WG and DOM WG have addressed that 
concern?


>However, as I brought up at the face-to-face, the W3C staff is 
>beta-testing something very similar to this.  It seems as though this 
>group should be the beta testers for that system, seeing as how this group 
>will need to recommend said system to other groups.

I looked back at the minutes, but it didn't have much detail.  Do we know 
who is doing this investigation, how active it is, and what is its status?
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 12:23:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:08 GMT