Re: New repos for specs

Sure, I'd recommend a name is proposed by the editors (and the same is done
for future specs)

On Tuesday, May 3, 2016, Matt Saxon <matt.saxon@gmail.com> wrote:

> Can we not name the sepa repo as you suggest, this covers more than just
> sepa.
>
> Let me have a closer look and suggest an appropriate name.
>
> Regards,
> Matt
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 3 May 2016, at 16:34, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The chairs have resolved to follow the pattern being adopted by other
> groups and use a new GitHub repo per spec.
> >
> > This will allow you to subscribe only to the repos you want to track.
> > We will still forward all repo update mails to the mailing list to
> accommodate those that are not on GitHub.
> >
> > Assuming we have no objections on Thursday's call we will move the basic
> card payment methods spec and payment method identifiers specs out of the
> browser API repo into their own repo and move the SEPA payment methods spec
> from the proposals into it's own repo.
> >
> > We are standardizing on a repo naming convention using the prefix
> "webpayments-" and will use "webpayments-method-" for any payment method
> specs.
> >
> > @Mike: Please can you create:
> >
> > w3c/webpayments-method-identifers
> > w3c/webpayments-methods-basic-card
> > w3c/webpayments-methods-sepa
> >
> > You can migrate the SEPA spec into it's repo before the call as the
> group already resolved to adopt this spec.
> >
> > Question: Would the group like to move the browser APi spec to:
> > w3c/webpayments-browser-api (or similar) or is this too much overhead
> and unnecessary?
> >
> > Adrian
> >
> >
>


-- 
Sent from a mobile device, please excuse any typos