Re: make default repo branch "gh-pages" or keep as "master"?

On 03/07/2016 11:03 AM, Richard Barnes wrote:
> I understand there are some ways to automate this, e.g., to sync
> gh-pages on merging a pull request.  Jeff: Maybe you could look at [1]
> and advise?
>
> [1] https://github.com/martinthomson/i-d-template


Yes, I believe github.io output can be automated for the Working Draft
(as per W3C routine) without too much trouble,  and I'd support gh-pages
for the *one* document that merges the 3 FIDO 2.0 Member Submissions. 
However, I just made github repos for the three documents without
gh-pages to reflect the consensus of the WG to formally adopt the FIDO
2.0 drafts and as a baseline to start the editing process of making our
FPWD as a unified document.

Let's aim to get that FPWD done by our next F2F - likely May in Berlin.
As for telecons, I'll send a separate email at the end of tomorrow as a
few crucial folks still haven't responded to the Doodle poll.


  yours,
    hary


>
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Hodges, Jeff <jeff.hodges@paypal.com
> <mailto:jeff.hodges@paypal.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 3/5/16, 5:14 PM, "Mike Jones" <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com
>     <mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>> wrote:
>
>         Can we please just use “master”?  Git is hard enough without
>         having to remember that this repository’s Git procedures are
>         different from every other Git repository that I use!
>
>
>     using master as the "default branch" is fine by me, it just means
>     that whenever we wish to "publish" the repo
>     to http://w3c.github.io/webauthn/* we have to do an explicit push
>     to the gh-pages branch.
>
>
>
>         *From:*Hodges, Jeff [mailto:jeff.hodges@paypal.com]
>         *Sent:* Saturday, March 5, 2016 4:37 PM
>         *To:* W3C WebAuthn WG <public-webauthn@w3.org
>         <mailto:public-webauthn@w3.org>>
>         *Subject:* make default repo branch "gh-pages" or keep as
>         "master"?
>
>          
>
>         http://w3c.github.io/specs.html appears to suggest making
>         one's repo's default branch be "gh-pages" 
>
>          
>
>         doing so would mean that all work-in-progress* (merged) in
>         (to) the gh-pages branch will be publicly available
>         automagically at http://w3c.github.io/webauthn/* 
>
>          
>
>             e.g:
>              http://w3c.github.io/webauthn/webauthn-web-api/Overview.html 
>
>          
>
>         If we keep "master" as the default branch, then we would have
>         an extra step of pushing changes from master to gh-pages
>         branch in order to publish "editors' drafts"
>
>          
>
>         However, in looking
>         at github.com/w3c/webappsec-credential-management
>         <https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-credential-management> it
>         appears that that is what they webappsec folk are doing over
>         there, so maybe that's the way we should go. 
>
>          
>
>         Again, http://w3c.github.io/specs.html advocates deleting the
>         master branch and using just the gh-pages branch, which'd
>         eliminate that extra push-to-gh-pages step noted above. 
>
>          
>
>         But I wonder whether our working draft(s) can be publicly
>         available (which is the case with everything in the gh-pages
>         branch) prior to reaching first public working draft (FPWD)
>         status -- Wendy/Harry?
>
>          
>
>         thanks, hth, 
>
>          
>
>         =JeffH
>
>          
>
>          
>
>          
>
>          
>
>          
>
>
>
>