W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > March 2015

Re: CFC to push use new publishing process, was Re: CfC to publish FPWD of Permissions API; ending March 25th

From: Devdatta Akhawe <dev.akhawe@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 10:39:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPfop_1oG8gXmGA3hbMcQRC3WS15Vek6tmAEGirM11g1F7kXpw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
Cc: Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>, Brad Hill <hillbrad@gmail.com>, wseltzer@w3.org, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>, Frederik Braun <fbraun@mozilla.com>, public-webappsec@w3.org, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
I dont know how many more +1s you need to assert group consensus but I
support this too
 On Mar 25, 2015 9:58 AM, "Mike West" <mkwst@google.com> wrote:

> I also support using the new process for all our deliverables.
> On Mar 25, 2015 5:54 PM, "Brad Hill" <hillbrad@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I support using the new publication process for all of our deliverables.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:39 AM Frederik Braun <fbraun@mozilla.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 25.03.2015 16:54, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On March 18, 2015 at 5:04:55 PM, Mounir Lamouri (mounir@lamouri.fr)
>>> wrote:
>>> >> This is a call for consensus to publish the following draft of
>>> >> "Permissions API" as a First Public Working Draft:
>>> >>
>>> >> https://w3c.github.io/permissions/published/2015-03-FPWD.html
>>> >>
>>> >> The CfC will end in a week (25th of March). If you think that this
>>> >> document should not be published, please send comments on
>>> >> public-webappsec@w3.org. If you want to discuss the API details,
>>> >> replying to this email is welcome but we would greatly appreciate if
>>> you
>>> >> could open an issue :)
>>> >
>>> > Given this CFC has now ended successfully, this is a new 1-week CFC to
>>> use the new W3C publishing process for the Permissions spec: This would
>>> mean that Working Drafts on GitHub will be automatically pushed to /TR/
>>> during the Working Draft stage of this specification.
>>> >
>>> > If you have any concerns, please let us know. Otherwise, silence will
>>> be taken as support.
>>> >
>>> > Many thanks!
>>> >
>>> > PS: Brad, Daniel, it would be awesome if the was group-wide consensus
>>> to use the new publication process. It would save a lot of CFC emails and 1
>>> week delays waiting for consensus. This is what we did for WebApps.
>>> >
>>>
>>> I'd love this for Subresource Integrity, where the /TR/ revision is
>>> badly out of date (over one year, actually).
>>>
>>> +1 from me, for group-wide.
>>>
>>>
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2015 17:40:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:11 UTC