Re: Proposing a way for handling actions in the group (and sorry for some possible noise...)

+100it always bothered me that there was no irc<->github integration like we have it for w3c's old action/issue tracker.thanks for the great work ivan!br simon
-------- Original message --------From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> Date: 3/11/19  11:34  (GMT+01:00) To: W3C JSON-LD Working Group <public-json-ld-wg@w3.org> Subject: Proposing a way for handling actions in the group (and sorry for some  possible noise...) Dear all,this was discussed in one of the previous calls: there is a need to manage actions in the Working Group. I have therefore spent some times to see what can be done about it. After having discussed it with Benjamin and Gregg (thanks for the feedbacks!) I modified the scribe generation script to do the following:- Actions are to be added on IRC as now. - The minute generator (ie, scribejs) picks up those actions and raises an issue for each of those in a repo that is part of the configuration. (In the case of the JSON-LD WG I propose to use 'json-ld-wg'). The issue: - includes a unique ID as part of the title (which helps avoiding that the same action is raised twice in case the minutes are re-generated for whatever purpose) - the issue is assigned to the person in github (in case I have that person's github id in my files…) - the issue text itself has a link to the relevant portion of the minutes. - the issue is labeled 'action'- Examples of a specific test repo can be seen in, e.g.,[1]. Note that the action assigned to, e.g., Rob[2] is not assigned to him, because he does not have a read permission in github for that repo.- From that point on, actions can be handled as issues: when an action is completed, the relevant issue can be closed.Now comes the more disagreeable side: I have done my best to test the new system on the test repo[1], but comes a time when this has to go live. That means you will get mails in your mailbox on new actions being raised for you. The problem is that, of course, there will be bugs, which means that I may have to repeat the round. This means you may receive some unnecessary noise. Sorry for that…Before I do this, however, I would appreciate if you looked at [1] and [2] and tell me whether you feel this is something worth finishing, whether you have any comments, etc. B.t.w., my plan is to run the script against the minutes starting 1st of January, ie, reconstructing things for this year.WDYT?ThxIvan[1] https://github.com/iherman/oct_test/issues[2] https://github.com/iherman/oct_test/issues/16P.S. Scribes, the rule to follow is to really spell it out an action as defined; I have hit an action in one of the minutes of the form 'gregg and pchampin to XYZ', which is a source of problems because the system takes anything before 'to' as the irc nickname of the assignee...
----Ivan Herman, W3C Publishing@W3C Technical LeadHome: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/mobile: +31-641044153ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704