Re: Should the specs be forked and maintained elsewhere?

A meeting schedule might solve the cold start problem, but I would start 
small with a monthly.

Cheers,
- Sean

Sean O'Brien
Visiting Lecturer (Cybersecurity), Yale Law School
Fellow, Information Society Project at Yale Law School
Founder, Privacy Lab at Yale ISP,https://privacylab.yale.edu

On 3/21/23 17:25, Bob Wyman wrote:
> I've seen several suggestions that, due to inactivity in this group, 
> it would make sense to fork either or both of the ActivityStreams and 
> ActivityPub specs with the intent to develop them further and maintain 
> them elsewhere. The most recent suggestion 
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsocialhub.activitypub.rocks%2Ft%2Fshould-we-fork-as-ap-specs-to-codeberg-create-vnext-drafts%2F3022&data=05%7C01%7Csean.obrien%40yale.edu%7C259b1df6f6834da7a84508db2a52ef04%7Cdd8cbebb21394df8b4114e3e87abeb5c%7C0%7C0%7C638150307920582583%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sZNxPD1wuUepr%2BhM5gfRNnpVPSW2c83eDcqyJzcLaRE%3D&reserved=0> 
> that I've seen was made in one of the forums on the ActivityRocks site.
>
> My personal feeling is that the proper forum for maintenance of these 
> W3C specs is within this community. Am I correct? However, I 
> sympathize with others who feel that maintenance is simply not 
> happening. There are now 55 open issues 
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Factivitypub%2Fissues&data=05%7C01%7Csean.obrien%40yale.edu%7C259b1df6f6834da7a84508db2a52ef04%7Cdd8cbebb21394df8b4114e3e87abeb5c%7C0%7C0%7C638150307920582583%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Q1yhMDQiLzeDE4JVBy6i9PnZYVu5%2BW%2B0s5EuHx9Yc7k%3D&reserved=0> 
> on ActivityPub's GitHub repository and 58 open issues 
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Factivitystreams%2Fissues&data=05%7C01%7Csean.obrien%40yale.edu%7C259b1df6f6834da7a84508db2a52ef04%7Cdd8cbebb21394df8b4114e3e87abeb5c%7C0%7C0%7C638150307920582583%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=yDO9nNt2fg1XLV6fL8rekWLucHIzkdt%2FJhh1OIK4Bo0%3D&reserved=0> 
> on the ActivityStreams repository. Who is responsible for addressing 
> those issues, closing them, or taking action on them? What is the 
> process by which these decisions will be made?
>
> Other W3C groups that I've worked with have regular Zoom or Jitsi 
> meetings to discuss issues. Why doesn't this group ever have such 
> meetings?
>
> bob wyman
>