- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 17:37:15 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `csswg.org`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: Adopt Mike Smith's MD-based GH pages wiki` * `RESOLVED: Archive what we got. Not setting up new IRC logging for now.` * `RESOLVED: Ask for redirect from old ical feed to the W3C calendar feed, if possible.` * `RESOLVED: Drop old spec generator, irc bouncer, and various accounts.` * `ACTION: fantasai to look into it` * `RESOLVED: Request an archive of the wiki data.` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <fantasai> Topic: csswg.org<br> <fantasai> github" https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12054#issuecomment-3955682731<br> <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12054#issuecomment-3955682731<br> <ChrisL> q+<br> <astearns> ack ChrisL<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: Seems straightforward<br> <tantek> +1<br> <fantasai> astearns: Redirect to draftserver<br> <ChrisL> q+<br> <florian> q+<br> <fantasai> astearns: Redirect to new GH-based wiki<br> <astearns> ack ChrisL<br> <tantek> q?<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: Just before this meeting, I noticed since it was a static 1-time conversion, I fixed an error and it was easy.<br> <astearns> ack florian<br> <tantek> does the GH wiki have the csswg wiki history?<br> <fantasai> florian: Not sure, but there were 2 efforts to replace the wiki. One with a GH-wiki based solution, and one with a GH-pages based solution<br> <tantek> +1 florian<br> <keithamus> q+<br> <fantasai> florian: Advantage of wiki is slightly better editing workflow, but it doesn't maintain URL hierarchy.<br> <tantek> s/of wiki is slightly/of GitHub wiki is slightly/<br> <astearns> ack keithamus<br> <fantasai> florian: I thought the GH-pages solution was neat, since it maintained all the URLs and hierarchy<br> <fantasai> florian: Was there a comparison of the two?<br> <fantasai> keithamus: Doesn't have that ability right now, but talking with GH to get that implemented.<br> <fantasai> keithamus: One option was to use a repository, which would be a collection of MD files that get published somewhere<br> <fantasai> keithamus: Benefit of that is it is more presentable. It's a website we can control look and feel of. And more likely to preserve existing navigation structure.<br> <fantasai> keithamus: Downside is largely editing friction.<br> <fantasai> keithamus: Anyone who has access to csswg-drafts can just edit.<br> <fantasai> keithamus: No need for PRs.<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: I didn't make a PR when I edited just now. I just hit commit.<br> <fantasai> keithamus: Which one were you using the drafts repo or the gh-pages repo?<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: drafts repo<br> <fantasai> keithamus: That one doesn't use PRs<br> <tantek> +1 to URL persistency<br> <fantasai> florian: I think URL persistency is useful. 1. We've had these URLs for a long time. 2. Next time we want to migrate, we will be at a URL space we can't control.<br> <fantasai> +1<br> <fantasai> florian: We can't set up redirects pointing somewhere else.<br> <tantek> +1 good point Florian, a GH wiki is a dead-end in terms of migration (roach motel)<br> <fantasai> keithamus: We don't have to redirect it to github.com. We can have the wiki, and use GH action to generate a static site.<br> <fantasai> florian: But people will likely access the site directly (and therefore use/post those URLs)<br> <fantasai> florian: I have a weak preference over how implemented, and a strong preference for controlling our own URLs.<br> <tantek> +1 florian. controlling your own URLs is good<br> <fantasai> +1<br> <tantek> q?<br> <tantek> q+<br> <cwilso> +1<br> <fantasai> astearns: Is there a repo-based wiki?<br> <astearns> ack TabAtkins<br> <fantasai> florian: Yes, Mike Smith set one up<br> <astearns> ack tantek<br> <fantasai> tantek: It would be preferable if we're able to maintain the wiki history and the ability to browse those revisions.<br> <fantasai> ... Quite a bit of history that would be a shame to lose.<br> <keithamus> sideshowbarker's effort is here: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-wiki<br> <keithamus> q+<br> <fantasai> astearns: Not sure we have a proposal to preserve the existing history.<br> <florian> q+<br> <fantasai> tantek: Mike's copy scraped from csswg.org. If he could get raw data from dokuwiki back in, might not be hard to script recreating all the revisions.<br> <fantasai> tantek: Different interface, but still there.<br> <fantasai> tantek: Tertiary concern would be maintaining links to old revisions, but that might require server magic.<br> <astearns> ack keithamus<br> <ChrisL> q+<br> <astearns> ack florian<br> <fantasai> keithamus: I think both of us ended up scraping the site as-is. If we could get access to the wiki database, should be able to handle revisions.<br> <fantasai> florian: In principle, seems useful. But I think we have 2 days? Could be able to extend if cover the cost...<br> <astearns> ack ChrisL<br> <keithamus> q+<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: Similar point, yes would be good to preserve history. But we need to decide what's our canonical wiki going forward.<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: If someone is registering for F2F, where do they register?<br> <astearns> ack keithamus<br> <fantasai> keithamus: Once we decide, I will make sure one ported from the other. GH wikis are git repos, just with a different URL.<br> <florian> q+<br> <fantasai> keithamus: So easy to port patches across. Just need to know. Pick one and migrate.<br> <astearns> ack florian<br> <fantasai> florian: I suggest we start with -- and possibly stay with -- the readme-based one and keep the URLs.<br> <fantasai> florian: We can migrate to other option later if we need to. But can't go the other way around.<br> <tantek> +1 start with the one that preserves the URL space<br> <fantasai> florian: If we decide we don't like it, then we can move again.<br> <cwilso> +1<br> <fantasai> +1<br> <keithamus> +1<br> <fantasai> astearns: Proposed to use the repo-based wiki, set up redirects as needed. Objections?<br> <fantasai> astearns: The one Mike Smith set up.<br> <tantek> my understanding is that the repo wiki can also be updated with history in the past?<br> <lwarlow> +1<br> <fantasai> PROPOSED: Adopt Mike Smith's MD-based GH pages wiki<br> <fantasai> RESOLVED: Adopt Mike Smith's MD-based GH pages wiki<br> <fantasai> astearns: Another question is IRC logging. Right now we don't have a solution to replace the IRC logs. We should archive them and make sure the inbound links still work.<br> <fantasai> astearns: Are we OK going without further IRC logging from csswg.org?<br> <fantasai> florian: Doesn't W3C provide IRC logigng?<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: During meetings when someone invokes it, yes. But it's not constant logging.<br> <emilio> q+<br> <fantasai> tantek: Can you tell RRSAgent to stick around?<br> <fantasai> astearns: Anyone currently relying on IRC logging?<br> <fantasai> florian: I've accessed it now and again<br> <astearns> ack emilio<br> <fantasai> emilio: My use case for that is covered by gh-bot posting minutes<br> <fantasai> emilio: rarely need to look at something that happened outside a meeting in the IRC channel.<br> <fantasai> emilio: Most of the discussion often happens in other places like Matrix<br> <fantasai> fantasai: agree with emilio. Main concern is that we forget to invoke RRSAgent.<br> <tantek> can we teach github-bot to reinvite RRSAgent if it ever leaves? ;)<br> <fantasai> astearns: Proposed to set up a static copy of the logs, so that existing links will work.<br> <ChrisL> +1<br> <dbaron> Note that https://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ also has logs from 2008-2015<br> <tantek> +1 florian serve them from the old URLs<br> <fantasai> florian: Are we redirecting or serving from the old URLs?<br> <fantasai> astearns: I would leave up to systeam.<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: systeam has asked what we need<br> <fantasai> astearns: Any objections to letting go of csswg.org server IRC logging and setting up an archive of the logs that exist?<br> <tantek> +1 with redirects from the csswg org IRC logs<br> <fantasai> RESOLVED: Archive what we got. Not setting up new IRC logging for now.<br> <fantasai> astearns: Is anyone depending on the IRC bouncer?<br> <fantasai> [silence]<br> <fantasai> astearns: Anyone depending on the ical feed?<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: If you are, you should use the W3C calendar which is actually up to doate.<br> <tantek> can we redirect the csswg org ical feed to the w3c calendar ical feed><br> <fantasai> astearns: Anyone using IMAP of www-style?<br> <fantasai> astearns: Various accounts and aliases set up with server, any workflows depending on it?<br> <florian> q+<br> <fantasai> astearns: Not sure what redirect to ical feed would accomplish. You can subscribe to w3c calendar already, why redirect?<br> <fantasai> dbaron: Most people have an individual W3C calendar which is what you really want to subscribe to.<br> <fantasai> dbaron: Possible someone outside CSSWG might want to subscribe to CSSWG meetings feed, but that seems quite rare.<br> <astearns> ack tantek<br> <fantasai> tantek: Just general principle of preserving URL if obvious destination<br> <fantasai> tantek: So seems reasonable to request a redirect to the new W3C one.<br> <fantasai> PROPOSED: Ask for redirect from old ical feed to the W3C calendar feed, if possible.<br> <tantek> general principle of preserving URLs + one URL redirect is not a big request<br> <dbaron> https://www.w3.org/groups/wg/css/calendar/ does have URLs at the bottom<br> <fantasai> florian: Public feed.<br> <tantek> +1<br> <fantasai> RESOLVED: Ask for redirect from old ical feed to the W3C calendar feed, if possible.<br> <dbaron> sounds like the redirect could be to https://www.w3.org/groups/wg/css/calendar/export/<br> <tantek> yes that says it's public<br> <tantek> q?<br> <fantasai> RESOLVED: Drop old spec generator, irc bouncer, and various accounts.<br> <fantasai> fantasai: There are some things hooked up to csswg.org emails we might need to keep<br> <ChrisL> q+<br> <fantasai> fantasai: Might be good to set up forwarding for those addresses.<br> <fantasai> ACTION: fantasai to look into it<br> <astearns> ack florian<br> <fantasai> florian: A few more things<br> <fantasai> florian: Our editor's drafts are built just fine, and we have an index page<br> <fantasai> florian: However if you look at the fxtf drafts themselves, they've also been moved to our main repo but the fxtf index page is still on old server<br> <fantasai> florian: Similarly houdini drafts and corresponding index page are still running off old server<br> <fantasai> florian: Need same migration for those.<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: If you look at the drafts of fxtf, looks like old drafts page, but if you hit a link<br> <fantasai> florian: yes, but the index page itself will go down<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: I think systeam has had me to fix all those dns things.<br> <fantasai> florian: We need to have something to redirect *to*<br> <fantasai> astearns: migrate the specs to main repo<br> <fantasai> florian: fxtf has been, and houdini not<br> <fantasai> ChrisL: On me to move it over.<br> <astearns> ack ChrisL<br> <tantek> q+<br> <fantasai> astearns: Ok, will take this back to Peter and systeam.<br> <fantasai> tantek: One specific request, can we get a dump of the wiki database in whatever format is easiest for him to do.<br> <fantasai> tantek: That may greatly enable recreation of wiki history.<br> <fantasai> RESOLVED: Request an archive of the wiki data.<br> <tantek> s/archive of the wiki data/dump of the wiki database<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12054#issuecomment-3960863430 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2026 17:37:16 UTC