See also: IRC log
<timeless> Scribe: timeless
<ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 15 February 2011
<scribe> Scribe: Josh
<scribe> ScribeNick: timeless
MB: We want to talk about Mercurial workflow
DS: yep
... We had talked about talking about Tracker
<mbrubeck> In the last telcon, we also talked about test suite code hosting and public forking/contributions.
MB: Quick summary ...
<Dzung_Tran> I have a conflict, so I was just going to follow on IRC
MB: for SW, DS, myself --
editors, we need to decide how we are going to merge
eachother's changes
... there are many things we could do
... two of the simple ones are ...
... using the CVS model where we each push/pull from a single
centralized repo
... or we could each have our own repos, push our changes to
our individual clones
... and once changes have been discussed, we could push to the
official repo
DS: What are the advantages of each approach?
MB: The centralized approach is
easier for people to follow
... The advantage of people publishing changes before they're
integrated is that it provides a way for people to review
proposals before they're made
DS: So this touches on Review
then Commit or Commit then Review model
... traditionally @W3C we follow a Review then Commit
... At HTML/SVG
... WebApps, CSS(?), all use Commit then Review
... In the newer browser centric groups, we typically do Commit
then Review
... it tends to be faster and provides context for review
MB: In distributed you can do Commit, then Review, then Merge (=Accept)
DS: I think that's OK
MB: We could do any of
these
... If the editors want to use a central repo
... And other people especially people without write access
could use clones
DS: I tend to favor for non
controversial changes, in order to make it easy for people to
understand what's going on with the group
... using the central repository for the three editors
... But if we have controversial things, we could do something
else
MB: I think that's OK, since there aren't many editors
DS: I'm very intrigued by the
prospect of having distributed changeset.
... people sending in patches on a mailing list
... I like the idea of multiple editors getting their ideas out
there
... and letting people decide which works best
MB: And we'll probably see some
of that
... we've already seen some of that w/ SW
DS: And i'll see some of that with Hg
MB: Using central you'll have
simple pull merge cycle
... but it won't feel much different from CVS
JS: Another way to do things is
to use Branches
... but I'm not at all in favor of it. Merely noting it's
possible
AB: So it sounds like we're in
favor of using a central repo
... does that seem like a fair characterization?
... Anyone else have feedback/input?
RESOLUTION: Stick with central repo
DS: So, we covered what +
how
... but we haven't talked about The Who
... Do we want to have MB/SW make some changes?
MB: I think I can do some simple changes
DS: You can make some changes and
cause me to need to do a merge.
... It will be good practice for you (editing) and for me
(merging)
... MB: have you ever been an editor before?
MB: no
AB: So we also agreed to a Commit then Review model
RESOLUTION: We will follow the Commit then Review model
AB: ... this will align us with the other groups DS mentioned
DS: I'd also like to use this
group to do some experimenting
... but for starters, I think this is fine
... so MB, for next week, you'll make some small changes?
MB: Yes, I'll look through the issues on the mailinglist and see which ones I can address
DS: I think that leads us to our next topic
DS: So, Tracker is our issue tracker
<ArtB> tracker: http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/
DS: Let's walk through creating
an issue and creating an action
... MB: have you used Tracker before?
MB: No, I haven't
DS: It's rather simple
<shepazu> ACTION: matt to update touch events spec for next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-11 - Update touch events spec for next week [on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-02-22].
<ArtB> Scribe+ Art
<ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB
<mbrubeck> and then I can see http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/11
DS: can create Actions via IRC
interface
... and can create Issues via IRC as well
<shepazu> issue: resolve touch area re. radius and angle
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-1 - Resolve touch area re. radius and angle ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1/edit .
DS: (provided trackbot is running ...)
<shepazu> issue-1?
<trackbot> ISSUE-1 -- Resolve touch area re. radius and angle -- raised
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1
DS: then in IRC, can say
"ISSSUE-n?" where n is an issue number
... and trackbot will dump out the issue
... same thing works with "ACTION-n?"
... don't forget the "?" at the end
... Raised state means raised
... Open means WG agreees it is an issue
<scribe> ... Pending state means we are awaiting feedback
<scribe> ... Postponed state means the Issue will not be released in the current spec (postponed to v2)
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: Can also select
the issue/action's "product"
... currently we just have the one Touch Event product
<shepazu> http://www.w3.org/mid/4D470F74.9020208@canonical.com
DS: after an Issue is created, an
email will be sent to public-webevents
... if an email includes a {ACTION,ISSUE}-n tag, that email's
archive link will be added to the issue or action
<shepazu> issue-1?
<trackbot> ISSUE-1 -- Resolve touch area re. radius and angle -- raised
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1
DS: f.ex. if you look at the
issue I just raised: http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1
... you will see the email trail
... can also define a "short name" for Issues
... which can be convenient way to identify an Issue
<shepazu> action-1?
<trackbot> ACTION-1 -- Arthur Barstow to work with Doug on a voice conference time of day that works for most people -- due 2010-12-15 -- CLOSED
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/1
<shepazu> action-11?
<trackbot> ACTION-11 -- Matt Brubeck to update touch events spec for next week -- due 2011-02-22 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/11
DS: Issues and Actions created in
IRC are "bare bones"
... Need to use Tracker's Web interface for more advanced
management tasks
... f.ex. can change due date (which defaults to 7 days from
creation date)
... tracker scans all emails on public-webevents
... for {Action,Issue}-n tags
... and adds a link to the emails archive to the Action or
Issue
MB: does Tracker track mercurial changes?
DS: no, I don't think so
... but we may be able to make something like that work
... there is an option to do that for CVS
... but sure about Mercurial
... I'll need to talk to sysadmin team at W3C
... we may also be able to connect commits to twitter
AB: I've been using Tracker for
years
... it's easy to use and that's good
... may be missing some features Bugzilla has
... but overall, it's a good tool
DS: a disadvantage to Bugzilla is all of the comment treads are kept in Bugzilla, whereas with Tracker, email is used for comment threads
AB: anything else on Tracker for today?
DS: I just logged one issue based on comments from two different people
<mbrubeck> ACTION: Matt Brubeck to raise issues on Tracker for previous mailing list discussions. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-12 - Brubeck to raise issues on Tracker for previous mailing list discussions. [on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-02-22].
DS: it may be good for Matt (and others) to create Issues based on comment from the list
JS: how does one get support for Tracker?
DS: everything is handled by W3C
sysadmin team
... and I can be your conduit to that team
AB: yes, please notify Doug and I if you have any Tracker issues and we will follow up
DS: I would like to walk thru a merge
MB: let's do that after the call
DS: OK
AB: I have some open action; I'll get to them RSN
DS: we didn't get much response
about UCs and Reqs
... but could defer them until next week
... re Andrew Grieve's email ...
... we may want to create some issues
<shepazu> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/0043.html
DS: re what should happen if
touch is dragged off the screen ....
... I think that is already addressed in the spec -> touch
cancel
... I significantly changed touch cancel
... oh, Matt, we should talk about "ReSpec" which is used by
the Touch Events spec
<mbrubeck> issue-2?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2 -- What should happen when a touch is dragged off the screen -- raised
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/2
AB: I don't think anyone has responded to the email
DS: I will respond to Andrew's
email
... will need to tighten up the spec re what happens when touch
is moved offscreen
... Matt, can you look at that?
MB: yes
DS: re 2nd issue ...
OP: I think this is closer to a mouse use case
<mbrubeck> re issue-2, different hardware devices may or may not be able to detect whether a touch was dragged off the screen or released normally.
OP: need to check this on an Android or iPhone
DS: I could test this
<mbrubeck> issue-3?
<trackbot> ISSUE-3 -- Click event target after DOM mutation during touchstart -- raised
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3
DS: would be good if someone
would write a test though
... any volunteers for that?
[Silence]
DS: ok, I'll write it
<mbrubeck> issue-4?
<trackbot> ISSUE-4 -- Does preventDefault on touchmove cause a dragging motion to fire a click event? -- raised
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/4
<scribe> ACTION: doug create a test for ISSUE-4 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-13 - Create a test for ISSUE-4 [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-02-22].
OP: remember to test mouse up and mouse down
MB: iPhone synthesize mouse
up/down
... mouse up, mouse move, click
... needed for compatibility of apps that know about mouse
events but not touch
DS: what are we doing about preventDefualt in general?
MB: will be impl-specific
... e.g. safari pans with touch move
DS: we don't define all default
actions the UA can take
... but we can define what preventDefault does
... There could be some issues around timing
... that we may need to define
<mbrubeck> MB: In mobile Firefox, for performance reasons, we also might want preventDefault on touchstart to affect which other touch events are fired. For example, if you don't preventDefault on touchstart, then no touchmove/touchend events will be dispatched.
DS: other than "don't do
that"
... that's good info
... perhaps you should put that in the spec
MB: let me bring it up on the list first
DS: sounds good
AB: let's continue discussion on
the lsit
... and meet again next week
<mbrubeck> shepazu: Want to try a merge?
AB: Meeting adjourned
<mbrubeck> We can remove the "test" and "test2" files
<shepazu> mbrubeck: yes, give me 15 minutes
<mbrubeck> ok
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/tracker/Tracker/ Found Scribe: timeless Found ScribeNick: ArtB Found Scribe: Art Found Scribe: Josh Found ScribeNick: timeless Found ScribeNick: ArtB Scribes: timeless, Art, Josh ScribeNicks: ArtB, timeless Default Present: Josh_Soref, Art_Barstow, Shepazu, Matt_Brubeck, Olli_Pettay, +1.781.266.aaaa, Cathy Present: Art_Barstow Matt_Brubeck Doug_Schepers Olli_Pettay Josh_Soref Dzung_Tran Cathy_Chan Regrets: Sangwhan_Moon Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/0048.html Found Date: 15 Feb 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html People with action items: brubeck doug matt[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]