Re: Announce CfC for moving mediacapture-main to CR

Right, the implementations don't have to be ready to pass yet.
Traditionally the test suite was a part of the call for CR, but Dom is
definitely the right one to let us know if guidance there has changed.

-- dan

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
wrote:

> The test suite is definitely not ready - Alex Gouillard has made
> substantial contributions, but it has been languishing for quite a while.
>
> I would like Dom's input on process here. If we really need to wait until
> we have a comprehensive test suite before asking for CR, I think we
> urgently need to make the WG aware of this.
>
> (I am positively sure that none of the implementations would pass a
> comprehensive test suite, and won't do so this quarter either, but that's a
> completely different matter.)
>
>
> On 04/06/2016 12:35 PM, Daniel Burnett wrote:
>
> Two thoughts:
> 1. Typically you only move to CR when you are pretty sure there will be no
> more substantive changes.  I am almost convinced that's the case :)
> 2. CR is also a call for implementations, usually based on a test suite.
> Is the test suite completely ready?  I haven't been directly following that
> but plan to soon; however, I got the impression we are not yet ready.
> In particular, the tests I find [1] look good but appear to be far fewer
> in number than I would guess we have normative statements for in the spec.
> The issue here is that a CR period normally has a defined end by when the
> Implementation Reports need to be in, something difficult to do if the test
> suite is not yet complete.
>
> I do absolutely think it is time to work on the wording for the Call for
> Implementations, meaning that we work out just exactly what we expect to
> receive from implementers in the form of an Implementation Report.  If this
> happened and I missed it, please feel free to point me in the right
> direction.
>
> -- dan
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/mediacapture-streams
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:58 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK <
> stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Dan is in the process of making a new Editor's draft which incorporates
>> the PRs #319 and #330.
>>
>> The chairs would like to announce a CfC to the TF (which will then I
>> suppose have to be cascaded to the parent WebRTC and DAP WGs) to request
>> a transition to Candidate Recommendation.
>>
>> We know there are still some open Issues, but we think they are all
>> solvable (something we would also say in the CfC mail).
>>
>> Does any of the editors see a problem with moving forward in this way?
>>
>> Stefan for the chairs
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
>
>