- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 11:48:32 +0200
- To: Evan Prodromou <evan@prodromou.name>
- Cc: "public-swicg@w3.org" <public-swicg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+iKDVW0Tj05MQmv9p3j51+oAN-gSyB5syAnqM5NdG-GQ@mail.gmail.com>
čt 4. 5. 2023 v 1:55 odesílatel Evan Prodromou <evan@prodromou.name> napsal: > Hello, everyone. I’m sharing here the list of issues that were triaged > today. > > https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/288 > https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/290 > https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/291 > https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/293 > > https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/289 > > I’ll be back to AS2 next week! Thanks to everyone who came. > Thank you for doing this. There are some concerns about the current process. Transferring closed issues from GitHub to a wiki might be problematic due to the following reasons: 1. Issues are closed and linked to a wiki explanation, while the wiki is not an established part of the group's workflow. 2. The content of the wiki may change over time, leading to inconsistencies in explanations for different topics, such as subtypes (last week). 3. The wiki, being editable by anyone, might not be a stable source of documentation. 4. It's unclear if the wiki genuinely addresses the questions or merely reflects one person's opinion at a specific moment. While using the wiki as a personal knowledge base is acceptable, we should consider a more structured approach. If an issue is closed, perhaps linking to a specific version of the wiki page might help, though it could still cause issues when the wiki document changes. A more robust process would be beneficial to maintain clarity and consistency. > > Evan >
Received on Thursday, 4 May 2023 09:48:49 UTC