W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcrypto@w3.org > October 2012

Re: Editors: Going with hg or sticking with CVS?

From: Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:27:12 -0400
Message-Id: <350A7E3C-651F-4635-B7EB-0D561CC2B610@mozilla.com>
Cc: "public-webcrypto@w3.org Working Group" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
Consider this a resounding OK from Arun 

A few things to bolster my earlier point about working more in public:

1. Repo + commit histories should be public.  This helps authors (e.g. it helped author of book on subject; also helps others see changes to issues and who fixed them, including commit comments of course).

2. Work flow tools should be public.  WebApps WG uses the W3C bugzilla installation.  This allows non-WG members (and those that don't attend our Conf. Calls) to file bugs on the spec.  This has been invaluable (e.g. Ms2Ger has already been cited as an example .)  Not 100% sure about Issue Tracker, but it seems that while the output is public, the participation is WG-only.

----- Original Message -----
> As it seems all non-WG members who commited to DomCrypt (i.e. man of
> mystery ms2ger) are OK with HG, so as soon as I get an OK from Arun
> I'll
> hit the switch button and update the WG homepage. Hopefully by next
> meeting!
> 
> On 10/19/2012 07:27 PM, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
> > wrote:
> >> So I checked in with Systems Team over
> >>
> >> cvs.w3.org:/w3ccvs
> >>
> >> being available or mirrored magically with:
> >>
> >> dev.w3.org:/sources/public
> >>
> >> as currently, looking at dev.w3.org, there's no "2012" branch 
> >>
> >> They responded that dev.w3.org and cvs.w3.org are deliberately
> >> separate
> >> repositories with different access rights and different services
> >> so should
> >> not be mixed as only cvs.w3.org:/w3ccvs reflects on www.w3.org
> >> mirrors while
> >> dev.w3.org:/sources/public has publicly visible cvsweb and
> >> anonymous public
> >> cvs pserver.
> >>
> >> Another option is we have a HG (mercurial) repo
> >>
> >> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcrypt
> >>
> >> That we could reset to make "webcrypto" and then move over Editors
> >> Drafts of
> >> both the existing API and a "new" use-case document over there.
> >>
> >> Editors - any opinion?
> >>
> >> Also, a plus of dev.w3.org/dvcs.w3.org is the public nature of the
> >> repos.
> >> Arun thought that the more public, the better, and I tend to
> >> agree.
> >>
> >>     cheers,
> >>         harry
> >>
> >>
> > HG. All the way. I have previously expressed support for this on
> > calls.
> >
> > If anything, simply being able to diff between revisions is worth
> > whatever reposistory-switch overhead. I'm a big fan of small
> > commits
> > with easily referenced URLs, which the current CVS system does not
> > encourage.
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 22 October 2012 18:27:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 October 2012 18:27:39 GMT