- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:14:24 -0400
- To: ext Sangwhan Moon <smoon@opera.com>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
- CC: public-indie-ui@w3.org, Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net>
On 6/21/12 1:31 AM, ext Sangwhan Moon wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:13:13 +0900, Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net> > wrote: > >> Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> It has been proposed that the version identifier be dropped as a >>> containing folder. I don't yet have the knowledge of Mercurial to >>> understand if we can maintain a clear relationship between branches and >>> W3C versions. >> >> I am much more familiar with Git than with Mercurial, though they are >> similar >> in broad outline. >> >> A further issue to consider is whether scripts are executed when a >> commit is >> made that update the editor's draft on the W3C site, and, more >> generally, how >> the repository is tied to the W3C's publication process. This may affect >> branch structure, e.g., if commits made to the master branch result in >> automatic publication within working group Web space, which is how >> the W3C's >> CVS repository used to work when I was an editor. > > If you create a named branch that corresponds to the W3C version, it > should be accessible > using the following URL syntax: > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/[repository_name]/raw-file/[branch_name]/[filename] > > As a example, Touch Events Version 1 can be accessed with the > following URL: > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/v1/touchevents.html > > (I can help with the branch setup after a draft is in place if needed) Great and thanks for the info above Sangwhan. So Michael - I agree with Sangwhan that we should use branches (rather than directories with version names/ids). If someone has never used branches, they can be a bit tricky both for the person editing a doc (the `push'er`) and the person that just wants their browser to display a doc but they also provide some advantages. If we use branches, the directory structure you proposed in [1] could then be simplified like this ... TOP=http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/indieui/ $TOP/events/indie-ui-events.html $TOP/events/tests/ $TOP/context/indie-ui-context.html $TOP/context/tests/ The users could then view the latest version (aka "tip") of the specs via: $TOP/events/raw-file/tip/indie-ui-events.html $TOP/context/raw-file/tip/indie-ui-context.html Assuming "v1" branches are created for each of these two html files, the user would use the following to view the v1 branches: $TOP/events/raw-file/v1/indie-ui-events.html $TOP/context/raw-file/v1/indie-ui-context.html You could of course include the `spec` directory you proposed too, but it doesn't seem necessary (although I don't feel strongly either way). (BTW, if there is interest, I have a short Mercurial/Hg "cheatsheet" I can send to you or can upload to some wiki if there is broader interest.) -AB [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-indie-ui/2012Jun/0021.html
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:16:17 UTC