W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc-editors@w3.org > October 2017

Re: Changing editors draft workflow

From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 23:36:37 +0000
To: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
CC: Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com>, Dan Burnett <danielcburnett@gmail.com>, "public-webrtc-editors@w3.org" <public-webrtc-editors@w3.org>
Message-ID: <24D859A4-B780-40F0-B11E-FA72E2019F3D@cisco.com>

> On Oct 9, 2017, at 5:54 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote:
> Le 06/10/2017 à 22:58, Bernard Aboba a écrit :
>> To clarify, this would mean that for webrtc-pc (the only document not yet at CR) there would be an editors' draft for each commit to master, right?  But that would end once the document is published as a CR?
>> [BA] How would change logs work? 
> Good question; I think our options are:
> A. making the last step before a merge (or while doing the merge) that
> editors add a matching line to the changelog
> B. requiring them in pull requests, with a new format convention since
> we would be moving away from specific date release; hopefully that
> convention would avoid conflicts on merge (but I'm not too sure how)
> C. removing changelogs from the document
> D. having them updated at a different pace from editors draft (e.g.
> weekly? biweekly?)
> E. having them autogenerated from the commit logs (which would probably
> require some convention for the commit messages)
> F. having them maintained into a separate document
> I would start with D while we figure out which of the others would
> otherwise work better.
> Dom

I could live with any of the above but I think B makes the most sense to me. 

Received on Monday, 9 October 2017 23:37:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:19:06 UTC