- From: Nick Stenning <nick@whiteink.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 09:59:16 +0200
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014, at 05:49, Ivan Herman wrote: > > On 25 Sep 2014, at 24:47 , Randall Leeds <randall@bleeds.info> wrote: > > > Noticed this from the minutes (sorry I wasn't there today): > > > > | <fjh> we should explore automating pull of github for w3c archive as backup mechanism > > > [...] > it's probably completely unnecessary from a disaster-recovery standpoint as long as any of > us are actively involved in the project. > > I agree. I do not think we have a real danger as long as some people > regularly update their local repository. [...] Sorry, I perhaps made my point in a slightly roundabout way on the call yesterday. GitHub is a great collaboration tool, and git is an excellent DVCS. I have absolutely no objections to our using either of these tools as part of our work. Indeed, I'd go so far as to say I can't recommend anything better! That said, I'm always made a little nervous when commercial services like GitHub become so ubiquitous that they begin to be treated like pieces of public infrastructure. As long as we're clear that our GitHub repository is solely a collaboration tool for an active working group, and not a canonical archive of any outputs of the WG (which, on reflection, is almost certainly how it was intended anyway) I'll shut up and stop causing trouble. Best, Nick
Received on Thursday, 25 September 2014 07:59:40 UTC