ISSUE-60: Chapter 7 should be moved to Github to encourage and facilitate contributions to its evolution
Ch7-Evolution
Chapter 7 should be moved to Github to encourage and facilitate contributions to its evolution
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Document life cycle (pre 2014 chapter 7, now chapter 6)
- Raised by:
- Arthur Barstow
- Opened on:
- 2013-11-26
- Description:
- The entire "Web Community" (not just the Consortium) should be encouraged to help with the evolution of Chapter 7. As such, the document should be moved to GitHub (or some similar service) to facilitate contributions from non Consortium members.
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- [minutes] and summary of 13 January 2014 Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference (from coralie@w3.org on 2014-01-13)
- closing issues... (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-12-05)
- Re: [tr] Proposed New Outline (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-12-01)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-60 (Ch7-Evolution): Chapter 7 should be moved to Github to encourage and facilitate contributions to its evolution [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-12-01)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-60 (Ch7-Evolution): Chapter 7 should be moved to Github to encourage and facilitate contributions to its evolution [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from w3c@marcosc.com on 2013-11-27)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-60 (Ch7-Evolution): Chapter 7 should be moved to Github to encourage and facilitate contributions to its evolution [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-11-27)
- Re: [tr] Proposed New Outline (from art.barstow@nokia.com on 2013-11-26)
- w3process-ISSUE-60 (Ch7-Evolution): Chapter 7 should be moved to Github to encourage and facilitate contributions to its evolution [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-11-26)
Related notes:
Suggested action Not Accepted. See the minutes of the 13 January 2014 Process TF meeting.
The TF agreed that
# the current time-frame isn't compatible with
moving the draft to Github,
# that comments should therefore still be sent
to the CG mailing list,
# that the draft being already in a W3C
repository it should be easy to access for
someone in the W3C community,
# and chaals said in his e-mail already that
putting the draft on Github would generate
extra work.Steve Zilles,17 Jan 2014, 05:44:51
Displaychange log
