W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > May 2015

Use of dated drafts (Re: Expiration for certificate management)

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 08:07:49 +0200
Message-ID: <55680235.5000508@alvestrand.no>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Replying to the PS, so changing the subject.....

On 05/29/2015 02:16 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>
> p.s., Apparently the certificate management changes I proposed have
> been merged, but I can't see them online.  The editor's copy is
> outdated.  Other specs are now editing directly on gh-pages, which
> means that the editor's copy is actually current, as opposed to some
> arbitrarily old copy.  I just looked at the process that is being used
> here and it's quite an unusual process.  I can only ask: why?  It's
> got to be much more work this way.
>
You can inspect the editors' working copy by pulling the main branch.

The purpose of using dated versions is to make sure that all listed
editors have actually had a chance to review what goes out in their
name; at least one listed editor has said that this is an important
consideration.

The separation between "working copy" and "published draft" should also
give a chance for making sure the "published draft" is not in an
inconsistent transition state in the midst of a change, but I'm not sure
how much we're actually succeeding in that.

Note: Before github took over the world, dated editors' drafts seems to
have been the norm.


-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
Received on Friday, 29 May 2015 06:08:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:44 UTC