- From: Erik Taubeneck via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 20:04:01 +0000
- To: public-patcg@w3.org
> It turns out that your personal repository (or any org in which you might choose to house a respository) works perfectly well for tracking issues with proposals. It seems that there are reasonable concerns around the impact of this suggestion on IP considerations. Specifically, it skips the step outlined in the CG's proposal workflow (as @michaelkleber points out): > **Join the group**. Before making a proposal, please [join the CG](https://www.w3.org/community/patcg/join). This is to ensure that all contributions to our work are covered by the [W3C Community Contributor License Agreement (CLA)](https://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/cla/). IANAL, so I won't comment on any actual difference between including it within this repo or elsewhere, but given that some have concern here, it seems reasonable to want to have these contributions within a W3C repo. Given that, the question seems to reduce to which group should it live in, PATCG or another group like the WICG. For proposals related to *private advertising*, it seems to me the PATCG would be preferable. To @darobin's suggestion > we can clearly communicate the status of the document. I would further suggest possibly making the title of the repo `proposal-<name>` for proposals, and `workitem-<name>` for adopted work items. -- GitHub Notification of comment by eriktaubeneck Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/proposals/issues/4#issuecomment-1064454572 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2022 20:04:03 UTC