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

Re: SourceForge and issues tracking

From: Rob Lanphier <robla@real.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:03:25 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011220132728.026b89a0@goobox.prognet.com>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
At 10:25 AM 12/20/01 -0700, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>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?

This is configurable (by the project admins).  We have the rtspspec issue 
submission wide open, allowing for anonymous submissions.  However, one can 
limit it to those who have accounts on SourceForge (open but 
non-anonymous), or one can make it private (only those with permissions on 
the project).  I can't tell how to set it up for read-only access to 
non-members, though.

>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?

There's no export of the trackers.  This issue has been raised 
before...they used to have it, but it fell into disrepair.  If you want to 
see reasons *not* to use SourceForge, go here:
http://www.advogato.org/article/357.html

(make sure you scroll down to "From the Director of SourceForge.net" to get 
the response from the SourceForge point of view).

>>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?

I can't remember who on the SysWeb team is working on this.  Here's the 
status report that references it (member only):
http://www.w3.org/2001/10/SysWeb-Summary.html

As I remember it, Gerald gave us the update on this.

Rob
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 17:02:10 GMT

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