- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 06:45:45 -0400
- To: sysreq <sysreq@w3.org>, Doug Schepers <doug@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Coralie Mercier <coralie@w3.org>
- CC: "public-touchevents@w3.org" <public-touchevents@w3.org>
Hi All, The Touch Events CG wants to do follow-up work on documents published by the now-closed Web Events WG. The Web Events WG used the hg/webevents/ repo and it *appears* that directory is not writeable by members of the CG that need write access. Please set the permissions of the hg/webevents/ repo so that everyone in the Touch Events CG can write to that repo. -Thanks, Art -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Should touchmove really always be synchronous and cancellable? Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 12:53:50 -0400 From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com> To: Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> CC: public-touchevents@w3.org <public-touchevents@w3.org> On 5/29/14 10:01 AM, Rick Byers wrote: > I've followed Anne's instructions > <http://annevankesteren.nl/2010/08/w3c-mercurial> for setting up > mercurial for w3c, but whenever I try to push I get: > > pushing to https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents > searching for changes > 1 changesets found > abort: authorization failed > > I've verified that the username/password I have in ~/.hgrc works at > http://www.w3.org/users/myprofile, and in --debug output hg does > appear to be trying to authenticate with this username and password. > Does my account perhaps need to be marked as having mercurial push rights? I suspect the problem is the write access rights for each hg directory is on a per group basis and since the Web Events WG was closed, probably no one except perhaps W3C staff can now modify the directory. Doug - would you please look into this and make sure all members of the CG can have access rights to hg/webevents/? > I've made a branch from 'v1' called 'v1-errata', set the status back > to 'ED', updated the pub date and replaced the list reference from > public-webevents to public-touchevents. All sound ok? That all sounds fine to me. -AB > > Thanks, > Rick > > > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com > <mailto:rbyers@google.com>> wrote: > > Ok, I'll start looking into how to make an update with hg (I'll > start with the simpler change in the other thread - fractional > touch co-ordinates). Jacob if you've got any notes/advice to get > me started that would be great! > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Jacob Rossi > <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com <mailto:Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>> wrote: > > In addition to Art’s point about the Principle of Least Surprise…. > > While I prefer git to hg, my preference here is to keep it in > hg so you can still diff against arbitrary editions past or > present. We could also create an errata branch to separate things. > > A W3C account is all that you need (technically, not > procedurally) to start publishing. Rick, if you’re > volunteering to do the editing then I can help you get the > environment set up. > > -Jacob > > *From:*Sangwhan Moon [mailto:smoon@opera.com > <mailto:smoon@opera.com>] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 5:16 AM > *To:* Arthur Barstow > *Cc:* Rick Byers; Doug Schepers; public-touchevents@w3.org > <mailto:public-touchevents@w3.org> > *Subject:* Re: Should touchmove really always be synchronous > and cancellable? > > On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Arthur Barstow > <art.barstow@gmail.com <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On 5/15/14 10:47 AM, Rick Byers wrote: > > I can also make proposed edits via GitHub if that's > better... > > I think the PrincipleOfLeastSurprise suggests people would > expect to find the latest ED of the spec where the Web > Events WG last worked on it i.e. > <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/v1/touchevents.html>. > Would you please clone that repo, try to push an update > and let us know the results? > > If we are to do this, then I think the respec meta data should > probably be rolled back so it doesn't show the document status > as rec to avoid confusion. > > (This mixed top and bottom posting is hard to follow...) > > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Arthur Barstow > <art.barstow@gmail.com <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com> > <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com > <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > On 5/9/14 11:48 AM, Rick Byers wrote: > > So should I just propose the exact text of the change > here in > e-mail and leave the doc work to you Doug (which the > community > could then review)? Or is there some system for me to > directly do the doc work, even though it'll be > published by > W3C staff? > > > I don't have a strong preference for you sending > proposal(s) to > the list vs. you updating the ED (although it seems like a > changeset/diff would be easier for reviewers, > especially if the > proposal affects more than one part of the spec). > > Doug? > > -AB > > > > > -- > Sangwhan Moon [Opera Software ASA] > Software Engineer | Tokyo, Japan > > >
Received on Friday, 30 May 2014 10:46:15 UTC