- From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 19:17:18 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com>
- cc: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>, Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com>, Odin Hørthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>, "public-test-infra@w3.org" <public-test-infra@w3.org>
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012, Rebecca Hauck wrote: > BTW, I nominated this topic as a session idea on the Plenary day at TPAC > next month. > > http://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2012/SessionIdeas#Moving_W3C_repositories_to_git I see that's listed as a session for someone else to organise/lead. If no one else wants I am quite happy to run such a session. > On 9/19/12 9:33 AM, "Tobie Langel" <tobie@fb.com> wrote: > >> On 9/19/12 6:27 PM, "Kris Krueger" <krisk@microsoft.com> wrote: >> >>> I believe it's a lot of extra work without a lot of benefit. >> >> I guess that depends whether we're planning to rely on the developer >> community to significantly help with test authoring... or not. Indeed this is a factor; github gets lots of exposure so we are much more likely to get test contributions from authors encountering bugs in their day-to-day work if we have a presence there. It is pretty annoying to get to the stage of making a pull request only to be told "do some midly compelex magic to format the patch for hg, then apply it to a different repository". Indeed I would expect most people to give up at that point. FWIW I strongly doubt that authors will ever be providing the majority of testsby number or anything. But their tests are valuable because they come from actual problems they have experienced. So I really don't think it is wise to operate in our own ghetto.
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 17:18:01 UTC