RE: webperf: repo(s) and issues

I don’t have a strong opinion. I do like the isolation of #2 from a pure task standpoint (finding all our specs, finding a specific specification from the WebPerf WG, etc) but I could be convinced either way.

Tobin

From: Ilya Grigorik [mailto:igrigorik@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 1:02 PM
To: Philippe Le Hegaret
Cc: public-web-perf; Marcos Caceres; Tobin Titus
Subject: Re: webperf: repo(s) and issues

+1 for both #1 and #2.

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org<mailto:plh@w3.org>> wrote:
Hi Folks (especially Marcos and Tobin),

we'd like some feedback on how to (re)organize our github repo and
issues to make sure it fits how folks would like to track us.

At the moment, we have one github repo [1] and a bad tracking system
[2].

The thinking is to have one repo per specification and use github issues
instead.

Do folks have a preference between something like
1.
 https://github.com/w3c/navigation-timing

 https://github.com/w3c/page-visibility

 (etc)

2.
 https://github.com/w3cwebperf/navigation-timing

 https://github.com/w3cwebperf/page-visibility

 (etc)

The first one has the advantage to be with the others but folks might
get lost in the numbers of repo under the w3c account.

The second one means that we stay isolated, ie easier to find our repos
but folks might not expect them to be separated.

Any objection against asking everyone to use github issues?

Philippe


[1] https://github.com/w3c/web-performance

[2] http://www.w3.org/2010/webperf/track/