- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 10:20:32 -0800
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Cc: Alfredo Serafini <seralf@gmail.com>, CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
On Feb 21, 2014, at 1:25 AM, Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote: > On 19/02/14 09:12, Alfredo Serafini wrote: >> Hi Andy, if you plan to mantain some source/documentation on github, >> that issue management it's really good, widely used, and permits also >> the usage of the @username reference, which may be used for discussing >> specific technical elements inline, as a sort of inline topic for every >> issue. >> >> Alfredo > > Alfredo, > > Yes, for the documents on github, that's the way I presume we're doing it and this was confirmed in the call. It works well for matters about a document where the editor can close the issue when done. > > But what about issues that are not specific to a document (at the moment)? > > In other WG, are proposed, refined before being accepted by the WG as "issues" and it is WG resolutions that close that kind of issue. That's a different a different kind of issue. The JSON-LD CG effectively used GitHub issues to track both spec issues and more general issues. It's really very effective. What we really need is a way to sync GitHub issues to the W3C tracker, and to get some trackbot/zakim integration. There is the issue of GitHub permanence to consider. We can reasonably expect Tracker issues and actions to be around indefinitely, GitHub's issue tracker is subject to their business requirements. But, it's really a great tool. Gregg > Chairs? > > Andy > >> >> >> 2014-02-19 10:00 GMT+01:00 Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org >> <mailto:andy@apache.org>>: >> >> On 05/02/14 13:17, CSV on the Web Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> >> ISSUE-1: There is no machine-readable mechanism available to >> describe how the set of files are related >> >> http://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/__track/issues/1 >> <http://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/track/issues/1> >> >> Raised by: >> On product: >> >> >> I was going to try to extract some points from recent email >> discussions and convert into possible issues. >> >> How are we gathering issues? Are we using that mechanism just yet? >> >> Which tracker? W3C or github? >> >> (The W3C one is linked from the home page. ISSUE-1 there is closed.) >> >> Andy >> >> >> > >
Received on Friday, 21 February 2014 18:21:07 UTC