13:52:01 RRSAgent has joined #git 13:52:01 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/12/17-git-irc 13:52:26 meeting: Using GitHub for W3C Specifications 13:52:33 rrsagent, please make record public 13:56:12 koalie has joined #git 13:56:44 tzviya has joined #git 13:57:58 shawn has joined #git 13:58:28 we doing the project review here, right? 13:58:57 present+ Coralie 13:59:04 present+ PLH, Wendy, Ralph 13:59:06 Slides are: http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/ 13:59:13 Present+ ivan 13:59:14 (same ones as Google slides) 13:59:24 present+ TzviyaSiegman 13:59:24 agenda+ scribe 13:59:25 ChrisL has joined #git 13:59:29 agenda+ permission to record 13:59:34 wseltzer has joined #git 14:00:05 jeff has joined #git 14:00:07 agenda 2 = notification of recording 14:00:50 xiaoqian has joined #git 14:00:53 Bert has joined #git 14:01:11 present+ plh 14:01:28 +shawn 14:02:06 Present+ Dom 14:02:11 phila has joined #git 14:02:32 present+ 14:02:39 present+ phila 14:02:45 ted has joined #git 14:02:46 Present+ Francois 14:02:47 present+ jeanne 14:02:48 Present+ Ted 14:02:55 present+ xiaoqian 14:03:00 Ian has joined #git 14:03:09 present+ xueyuan 14:03:12 present+ Ian 14:03:13 zakim, who's here? 14:03:13 Present: Coralie, PLH, Wendy, Ralph, ivan, TzviyaSiegman, shawn, Dom, Bert, phila, Francois, jeanne, Ted, xiaoqian, xueyuan, Ian 14:03:16 On IRC I see Ian, ted, phila, Bert, xiaoqian, jeff, wseltzer, ChrisL, shawn, tzviya, koalie, RRSAgent, Zakim, xueyuan, plh, jeanne, Ralph, laurent, ivan, yatil, tidoust, dom, r12a, 14:03:16 ... nikos, Mike5, renoirb|aw, Yves, denis 14:03:23 present+ r12a 14:03:52 nigel has joined #git 14:03:57 Present+ nigel 14:03:58 MichaelC has joined #git 14:04:06 present+ MichaelC 14:04:26 scribenick: jeff 14:04:34 shepazu has joined #git 14:04:56 kaz has joined #git 14:05:09 [slide 1] 14:05:13 present+ EricE 14:05:18 scribenick: Ian 14:05:31 -> http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/ slides 14:05:41 Presented by Phililppe Le Hégaret 14:05:43 present+ Kaz 14:05:54 q? 14:06:21 NOTE: This is being recorded by AUDIO 14:06:24 ...it will be made public 14:06:28 s/Phililppe/Philippe/ 14:06:34 ...if you do not wish to participate by audio.....don't speak up! 14:07:06 present+ shepazu 14:07:30 (Overview) 14:07:34 ....gaining experience 14:07:40 ...want to show how relates to process and patent policy 14:07:57 ...ultimately we'd like to harmonize how we use the tool across groups to make it easier to participate across groups 14:08:07 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/3 14:08:15 What is this NOT about? 14:08:30 virginie has joined #git 14:08:52 zakim, what color is the bikeshed? 14:08:52 I think Magenta haze 14:09:12 Judy has joined #git 14:09:16 present+ Denis 14:11:39 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/5 14:12:00 PLH: large developer community using it...makes sense for w3c community to use it as well 14:12:30 ...lots of tools (like post processing) available 14:12:53 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/6 14:13:29 tzviya has joined #git 14:14:32 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/7 14:17:18 Repository manager -> https://labs.w3.org/hatchery/ash-nazg/ 14:17:28 help track contributions from non-participants 14:17:42 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/8 14:18:22 -> https://github.com/dontcallmedom/github-notify-ml/ Tool to facilitate integration: github-notify-ml 14:18:49 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/9 14:20:10 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/10 14:20:55 present+ jeff 14:21:12 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/11 14:21:27 PLH: Reduce notifications to not be overwhelmed 14:21:28 vivien has joined #git 14:22:03 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/12 14:23:31 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/13 14:23:50 (re import: that applies if you have separate github repo, but also if you have a spec coming from any other separate version control system) 14:24:15 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/13 14:24:24 Note about force 14:24:34 Protect your main branch. 14:25:11 present+ vivien 14:25:12 Don't Use the Force 14:25:16 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/14 14:25:25 PLH: One or several repositories? 14:25:33 (pros and cons) 14:25:54 ...tools target 1 spec per rep 14:25:57 repo 14:26:41 1 repo advantage is easier migration of material and 1 issues list 14:26:52 [it's not so much that it is harder to move stuff from one spec to another; it's just that it's less revision history friendly] 14:27:16 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/15 14:27:24 PLH: when migrating to github DO NOT LOSE HISTORY of your spec 14:27:49 [FWIW, I've done that transfer a number of times, and can help with imports if people need guidance] 14:27:58 [and big +1 on not losing history] 14:28:07 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/16 14:28:28 PLH: invite comments! 14:28:31 ...easy to track 14:28:37 ...advertize your repo 14:29:17 ...group may accept them or not 14:29:18 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/17 14:29:29 zakim, q+ to ask if anyone creates a group repo to replace wiki with gh-pages and to manage actions as issues? 14:29:29 I see nigel on the speaker queue 14:29:41 Use labels to differentiate between bugs, enhancement, etc. 14:30:11 Note that issues can be searched alongside labels, and those generate stable URI for a combination 14:30:35 AdrianHB has joined #git 14:30:50 PLH: It's easy to give a +1 on github to support a proposal (there's even an emoji) 14:31:54 PLH: See dashboard for example of cross repo (?) issue tracking 14:32:11 -> http://www.w3.org/2010/webperf/board/ Web Perf Issue dashboard 14:32:25 nigel, you wanted to ask if anyone creates a group repo to replace wiki with gh-pages and to manage actions as issues? 14:32:26 [I've started looking at making it more generic and customizable] 14:33:02 nigel: One of problems that's arisen is what to do with actions 14:33:09 ...you've not mentioned so far interaction with tracker 14:33:20 ...tracker had been used previously for issues and actions 14:33:32 [in the WebRTC WG, we mostly assign people to issues instead of creating actions] 14:33:42 ...has someone created a repo for the group that is separate from the group's documentation deliverables for actions? 14:33:43 [but yes, some groups have done what Nigel describes] 14:33:44 q+ 14:33:53 ...have they used ghpages functionality to replace the wiki? 14:33:58 ack ivan 14:34:15 ivan: In our group we made use of explicit assignment of issues to people 14:34:31 also, the search facilities through the issues is very rich...see separate search page on github 14:34:39 [the tag manages e.g. its agendas via github https://github.com/w3ctag/meetings ] 14:34:46 ...that let's you find easily which issues have been assigned to a particular person 14:35:13 nigel: I hear other technique is to use labels on issues 14:35:21 ...so question: should you just replace the w3c wiki in github? 14:35:30 [Web Payments WG uses the github wiki] 14:35:32 [the TAG wiki https://github.com/w3ctag/wiki ] 14:35:42 plh: home page of web platform WG is actually on github 14:35:49 ...there's a separate repo for the home page of the WG 14:36:15 -> https://w3c.github.io/WebPlatformWG/ Web Platform Working Group homepage 14:36:15 ...that repo does not contain any deliverables 14:36:17 [Web Payments WG has a repo for the group and will create new ones for specs when we start writing them] 14:36:19 Nigel: that answers my question! 14:36:54 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/18 14:36:55 [... and therefor, as Ian says, uses the wiki on that repo] 14:36:55 -> https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/ Web Platform Working Group homepage repository on GitHub 14:36:57 closing issues 14:38:24 PLH: Some groups allow closing by individuals, some close after X days, 14:38:32 ...pick a closure policy that matches your group size, culture 14:38:39 ..make it as easy as possible to close typo fixes 14:38:49 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/19 14:38:54 [I interpret "allowed to close" and "can close" on the slide as "entitled to ..." 14:38:58 wide review / horizontal issues 14:39:15 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/19 14:39:36 PLH: My thinking is that we can use labels (e.g., "Security") 14:39:48 (Slide 19 includes a list of proposed labels) 14:40:18 Web platform forms team for reviewers 14:40:32 if you are interested in issue of type X you should join a team 14:40:40 q+ 14:41:01 ack r12a 14:41:09 +1 on the team and label idea \o/ 14:41:15 +1 to support these labels 14:41:25 r12a: We'd like to be able to label issues 14:41:35 ...e.g., browsing repo we'd like to be able to track some issues 14:41:38 ...can we add labels? 14:42:04 PLH: I think Teams may work since you can comment if you are part of a team 14:42:06 +1 to entitle other groups to label issues that impact them 14:42:13 [anyone with admin rights can add labels; but that means only staff by default] 14:42:23 ...since non participants may not have authorization to label arbitrary repos 14:42:37 ..thanks for the feedback 14:42:42 [we could also build a tool specifically to label issues on w3c repos] 14:43:07 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/20 14:43:32 PLH: I prefer pull requests to fix typos to email telling me to do so...just push a button 14:43:36 ...so encourage pull requests 14:44:16 ...encourage all WG to edit a spec! 14:45:29 ...enable peer reviews early 14:45:32 q+ to mention continuous integration as a tool to facilitate pull request management 14:45:39 ...Don’t require a pull request to fix a simple typo and allow direct commits for those 14:46:04 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-respec-ci Continous integration scripts for WebRTC specs 14:46:06 ack dom 14:46:06 dom, you wanted to mention continuous integration as a tool to facilitate pull request management 14:46:27 dom: With regard to pull requests, we've found useful in WebRTC to use continuous integration systems 14:46:32 ...Travis is such a system 14:46:41 ...we have a number of scripts that run when someone submits a pull request 14:46:59 ...easy for submitters to know that there's a missing reference, or WebIDL not well-formed, or markup bug 14:47:06 ....helps include quality of pull request 14:47:17 s/include/increase/ 14:47:21 i think a validator check tool would be useful ! 14:47:51 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/21 14:48:09 r12a, my script does html validation among other checks (both pre- and post-respec processing) 14:48:17 ...Merge pull requests as you close issues 14:48:21 aha! 14:48:28 PLH: Tip - Consider squashing the commits to maintain a clean commit history for your specification 14:48:44 ...this useful when there are multiple commits before getting to consensus 14:49:13 [also, regarding commit messages, I've found http://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/ to be a useful approach to writing commit messages] 14:49:16 q+ to wonder whether there is an easy online way to "view" the result of a PR on an an HTML spec 14:49:32 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/22 14:49:34 Github Team 14:49:50 PLH: Empower as many as possible in your group to be part of github team 14:49:59 ...avoid silos 14:50:05 tidoust, rawgit.com should work for that too, shouldn't it? 14:50:50 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/23 14:50:54 PLH: Ideally you use ghpages 14:51:03 ...github service makes easy to see on the web 14:51:08 ...if you do that you don't need master branch 14:51:09 It should, dom, but is directly available from a PR page? 14:51:16 ..you can make ghpages the default 14:51:31 q- 14:52:24 PLH: we are thinking about git branches as a way to manage flow on rec track 14:52:33 [some groups (for better or for worse) use master as a staging branch, and gh-pages when they want to release an editors draft] 14:53:17 PLH: If your edits reflect group consensus, your editors drafts are really like WDs 14:53:29 ....so through Travis you can publish your docs (using Travis) to /TR automatically 14:53:40 ...we know how to do this with respec 14:54:02 [you can view the outcome of a pull request by viewing the changed file, choosing 'View', then 'Raw', then adjusting the URL from raw.githubusercontent.com to rawgit.com] 14:54:05 q+ 14:54:32 ack r12a 14:54:34 ...note that pubrules checker tool we know will be retired by Aug 2016...new checker in development 14:55:10 r12a: Re ED-as-WG...we've encountered the issue of making comments and then patching them back to original document 14:55:22 ...we've had a lot of trouble having to look at Editor's drafts that have constantly changed 14:55:30 ...hard to track back to the draft that was the source of problems 14:55:38 ...so I18N WG publishes to TR often 14:55:49 ...we ask people to review the TR version since the editor's draft evolves 14:55:54 PLH: Coming up in the talk! 14:56:01 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/25 14:56:06 [Automatic publication workflow] 14:56:47 PLH: Question of "when to publish" 14:57:11 "significant change" 14:57:11 ..pros and cons to "on every commit" or "every significant commit" or "on demand" 14:57:22 ...but in any case, please don't let more than 6 months elapse between TR publications 14:57:51 q+ 14:57:57 ..that's a process requirement 14:58:21 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/26 14:58:27 [W3C process] 14:58:40 PLH: regarding the wide review requirement...suggest using labels 14:58:53 ...also note use of public-review-announce@w3.org 14:59:07 ...if you mention "wide review" in your doc, we have a tool that will automatically advertise your spec to that list 14:59:15 [What tool is that?] 14:59:49 -> http://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#wide-review Process-2015 6.2.3.1 Wide Review 15:00:10 PLH: You don't have to do anything to use the tool 15:00:16 ...just put "wide review" in the spec 15:00:36 PLH: Note that if you say "we don't want wide review' in your spec you'll hear from me...that's not coded! 15:00:54 -> http://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#revised-wd Process-2015 6.3.2 Revising Public Working Drafts 15:01:14 PLH: We don't yet have a recommended way to generate a disposition of comments from an issues list 15:01:28 ..there is a group that used labels to do that 15:01:42 [the CSV on the Web Working Group] 15:01:47 ...but we don't yet have a "recommended" way yet (their way worth consideration) 15:01:52 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/27 15:01:57 Additional tooling 15:02:05 PLH: Web Payments WG is using Wiki to build agenda 15:02:36 ...we do not have a tool yet to generate activity summaries 15:02:42 ...see modern tooling doc for more info: 15:02:49 ...and ideas 15:02:49 http://w3c.github.io/modern-tooling/ 15:03:10 ...for example, there's a tool called "gitter" that is a chat tool integrated with github 15:03:23 ..I don't know yet of any group that's decided to switch from IRC to bitter 15:03:37 http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/28 15:03:41 [Going forward] 15:04:33 PLH: If you are interested in a project review on details of using github (e.g., pull requests) or auto publishing, let me know. 15:04:42 [Slides done] 15:04:43 q? 15:04:44 agenda? 15:04:51 zakim, close item 1 15:04:51 agendum 1, scribe, closed 15:04:52 zakim, close item 2 15:04:52 I see 1 item remaining on the agenda: 15:04:52 2. notification of recording 15:04:53 agendum 2, notification of recording, closed 15:04:54 I see nothing remaining on the agenda 15:05:01 Reminder: Audio recording 15:05:15 ack ivan 15:05:16 ack ivan 15:05:26 ivan: Back on slide 26 15:05:26 I am very grateful for this session. This is the kind of information that is very useful and not documented in other places. 15:05:41 ivan: We've not used Echidna in our IG (not yet for IGs) 15:05:58 ...can I select a specific github branch to be used for automatic publishing 15:05:59 PLH: Yes. 15:06:37 ..the only problem with that (mentioned by tidoust) is that if you use something other than ghpages branch, you need to use the rawgit view...and if you have materials other than that page, there can be problems. 15:06:42 [I think echidna should be improved to retrieve content via git rather than just http] 15:07:18 ivan: if we use automatic publishing tool, sounds like it mostly only works with alternative 1 on (publish on every commit) 15:07:22 PLH: Yes, that's correct. 15:07:39 ...we don't yet have a way to do that with 2 or 3 (on slide 26) ... but mostly people haven't looked yet into doing it 15:07:42 ivan: Are there plans yet? 15:07:50 [the alternatives described are on http://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#revised-wd ] 15:08:08 plh: I'm not looking into it 15:08:10 s|http://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#revised-wd|http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1217-github-w3c/#/25| 15:08:33 agenda? 15:08:35 plh++ 15:08:42 plh++ 15:08:53 plh++ 15:08:54 thanks Ian for scribing and plh for the review! bye all! 15:09:07 rrsagent, make minutes 15:09:07 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/17-git-minutes.html Ian 15:09:10 rrsagent, set logs public 15:09:27 koalie has left #git 15:10:49 rrsagent, bye 15:10:49 I see no action items