- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 09:43:58 -0400
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: Michael™ Smith <mike@w3.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, Ms2ger <ms2ger@gmail.com>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 15:28 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > >> and from a DVCS standpoint it makes sense that this remains a > >> self-contained entity, much like the IndexedDB draft that is already > >> hosted separately.) > > > > It seems a bug to me to have IndexedDB separate. It's not going to be > > scalable if we created a new repository for each specification... > > Why would that not scale? We do not have that many specifications and they > all fit within the same directory on TR/ too. I guess if the name of the repository matches the short name of the TR page, this will avoid conflicts. > That will also avoid having > to merge each time for specifications you never touch, etc. Good point. btw, I'm not quite sure why you feel the need to go through me for the creation of the mercurial repositories. Mike or Doug can request those creations as well and I don't manage the mercurial server myself so, while I'm ok to be in the loop, don't feel that you have to go through me necessarily, Philippe
Received on Sunday, 19 September 2010 13:44:09 UTC