W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2013

Re: [spec tools] spec tools should be checked into the csswg repo

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 21:22:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDmNf-eS=oJeQEVhGJ6L40vQWOW1EOmBn+mjomduA=skw@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Cc: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:09 PM, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Dirk Schulze wrote:
>> Does the CSS WG have an GitHub account? Would it be ok if this
>> account would fork bikeshed from Tab and it gets merged once in a
>> while? Would that be sufficient enough? Maybe the concern is just
>> that Tab could (theoretically) restrict access to the repo, or the
>> account is lost/not available anymore for what ever reason.
>
> I think this hits both of my concerns.  For ease of use, it's a pain
> to have the spec data and tools spread across two different version
> control systems. And I don't like the idea that any one member of the
> WG has effective dictate power over the tools used to construct specs,
> however benevolent. I think it would be much better to have Tab
> continue to use his github repo for active development and push
> changes to the csswg repo whenever necessary.  That makes it simpler
> for new spec writers and hopefully avoids hiccups introduced by
> in-progress dev changes.

Bert has had "dictate power" over the processor for years; using mine
just means you're changing who you're relying on.  Using Anolis or
Respec would similarly put you at the mercy of Ms2ger (I think?) or
Robin.

As for two different version control systems, blame the W3C for
picking the wrong VCS when Git was already winning back then.  ^_^

Pushing updates to the CSSWG repo still wouldn't make it that easy;
again, you still have to install two modules.  It would just make it
more annoying for me, and increase the likelihood of people running
into bugs I've already fixed.  In-progress dev changes that have a
chance of breaking things *should* be done by me in a branch.  (I'm
not *great* at remembering to do this, but I'm trying to get better.)

Like I've already said, the correct thing to do is to just check in a
curl script (and a README) to the csswg repo that communicates with
Shepherd (which runs a local version of Bikeshed).  This is identical
to the workflow you have currently with Bert's processor.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 24 September 2013 04:23:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:34 UTC