<scribe> scribe: MichaelC
agenda order 1,2,3,4,5,8
We take commits from feature branches to master, then need to put in the stable branch after ready in all the related repos
was expecting to cherry-pick squashed merge commits, so simple
but winding up with lots of little editorial commits here and there, so harder to stay on top
JD proposal - put into master and stable right away, but in stable, add ednote that still awaiting work in another repo
when we want to publish, look for those ednotes
this means holding off publication until the ednotes cleared
or remove them in publication branch
or comment them out in stable along with the ednote, remove the comments when removing the ednote
this works for new features - for mods to existing features, harder to pick part what to remove
alternative would be to have ednotes in the TR version that says ¨feature not complete, don´t implement yet¨
because WG considers feature ready to go, albeit not mature in the other docs
But in APG, we might be unsure if it´s a good idea until we write the guidance, so unsure how mature the feature is
(this is just for feature changes, not new features, which still need the full workflow to show up)
can get complicated to manage all the little editorial things
maybe put the ednote in master, saying ¨awaiting readiness to move to stable¨
but still need to not get lost in editorial commits that should just merge
let´s ¨sleep on this¨ and come back
See thread starting at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-editors/2018Jul/0001.html
MC was expecting master would be a superset of any versions
so eddraft off that should be ok regardless of version
but APG has very version-specific stuff
expecting people use editors´ draft to get view of what´s coming
if they care about version, would look at TR
but for APG, people look at eddraft more
maybe could just annotate the 1.2 stuff
people might not distinguish enough to have 2 eddraft locations
better to help them distinguish in the eddraft
worry about confusing ourselves and others with what´s in what branch
master shoud be ¨unstable¨
for APG, let´s publish 1.2 with the generic eddraft URI
knowing it´s different content than actual 1.2
later, we can publish with a different eddraft URI if needed
or decide to modify what´s at that eddraft URI
[[WAI-ARIA-11]] changed to [[WAI-ARIA-1.1]]
for consistency, more built in specprod support
use versioned xrefs, so use [[WAI-ARIA-1.2]] note [[WAI-ARIA]]
unless a really good reason for unversioned
so when cross references followed, they´re more likely to find something that hasn´t disappeared
moved change log to ¨since last rec¨
prevRecURI - was pointing to dated version of ARIA
changed to undated
and unversioned
so instead of https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/REC-wai-aria-1.1-20171214/ uses https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/
Want to start CfC to publish later this week
as updated Note
send details to JD to start the CfC
then will tag a release, and MC prepare publication
don´t remove previous tag, even though it´s annoyingly showing up in the github releases panel
target 26 July publication, because of impending charter expiration, so need 48-hour CfC
For future agenda, explore using Travis for automated quality checks
Also, we´re having low quorum at these editors´ meetings, maybe we want to just use part of the WG call once per month?
though the calls can be useful when we have enough agenda, even with small participation
might go to once per month by default, unless something major going on
need to confirm Bryan´s availability
we didn´t rename when the repo split for technical reason
at this point, would rename via git mv rather than a branch filter
which will make it hard to find commits from before the rename
but the commits still are in the git history
do this at a time won´t surprise people
and need to do in all active branches
in whatever way is least painful for later conflicts
first do branch cleanup
MCK to let MC know when to do this
Next meeting is 1 August 2018
might switch to monthly after that
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152 of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found embedded ScribeOptions: -final *** RESTARTING DUE TO EMBEDDED OPTIONS *** Present: MichaelC Joanmarie_Diggs Matt Regrets: James Found Scribe: MichaelC Inferring ScribeNick: MichaelC Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-editors/2018Jul/0006.html WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]