Re: [CSSWG] Announcement: Spec issues are migrating to GitHub issues

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:08 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> On 05/19/2016 05:54 AM, Sebastian Zartner wrote:
>>
>> On 18 May 2016 at 19:53, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org <mailto:chris@w3.org>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 16/05/18 19:22, Alan Stearns wrote:
>>>
>>>     There was some talk of these notifications (issue open, issue close)
>>> but I haven’t seen that implemented by Houdini. Do you have that working for
>>> 118n?
>>>
>>     I added them to Houdini today, at the same time as I did for CSS.
>>
>>
>> I assume the issue titles should contain the spec. tags like we used to do
>> here on the mailing list, right?
>> Furthermore, what's the strategy for replying to an existing mailing list
>> thread? Should that discussions be ported
>> to/continued on GitHub?
>> For posting to the mailing list we have https://www.w3.org/Mail/
>> describing the rules to follow. What are the guidelines for
>> commenting on GitHub?
>
>
> I'm leaning towards just concluding existing threads on the ML.
> Moving discussions is not great.

Agree. We can shift *new* conversations that are accidentally started
here, but older convos are less disruptive if we just let them peter
out here.

Now we need to update the spec boilerplate to stop telling people to
email www-style...

~TJ

Received on Thursday, 19 May 2016 23:29:13 UTC