paul: would have a separate repository for the spec and test resources

ted: there is a repo for the Auto BG
... would make sense to have a repo "Automotive"
... can migrate the resources within the BG's one to the new repo

dave: moving resources from automotive-bg to automotive?
... clone the automotive-bg and create automotive
... so that all the history can be tracked

paul: this is the repo Ted has created

(goto meeting display)

(go through w3c/automotive-bg)

paul: let's keep all this stuff

ryan: what about media tuner stuff?
... will we create a new directory?

ted: just created "automotive"

(w3c/automotive)

ted: will create vehicle api, data, etc.
... and put other stuff as well

paul: this guy (w3c/automotive-bg) is for the BG

[paul starts to draw an image of the directory structure]

[on the goto meeting display]

[[

automotive

--media_tuner

  --api

  --use_cases

  --tests

--vehicle_data

  --api

  --use_cases

  --tests

]]

paul: there are two specs, Vehicle API and Data
... and tests may need multiple files
... any opinions on the structure and name?
... we're using wiki for use cases
... seems wiki is a good way to gather use cases
... we need two implementations for each spec
... all the implementations have to be public?

ted: commercial ones are ok

paul: does this basic structure make sense?

dave: depends on each group

[paul shows the repo of the Web Application Security Working Group]

[webappsec]

(some discussion on possible concern from the viewpoint of IPR)

-> https://github.com/w3c/presentation-api presentation api

-> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts CSS

-> https://github.com/w3c/tvapi tv control cg vs. https://github.com/w3c/tv-ggie tv ig

kaz: when I suggest we think about repositories for BG and WG, I was thinking about having automotive-bg for a developer version and automotive or automotive-wg for a distribution version

paul: don't think we should have multiple repositories

dave: we could use tags

paul: can identify distribution version as a snapshot

<ted> https://github.com/w3c/echidna/wiki/How-to-use-Echidna

ted: we can use the automatic publication tool above

dave: feature branch?

[dave put https://github.com/w3c/svgwg on the goto meeting]

[also put "v.2.8.4" is a tag: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mcavage/node-restify/v2.8.4/README.md]

<pb> Hello

<djensen47> hello

ted: three issues on the spec
... extensibility consideration, etc.

paul: you don't have to implement all the data properties

<djensen47> +1 to FAQ

ted: best practices
... will move the resources from the automotive-bg repo to the new automotive repo with all the history (if possible)
... Ted and Kaz will check the best practices of GitHub usage

<djensen47> ted: moving with history might be tricky

<ted> i'm looking around for techniques, this one is incomplete afaict http://gbayer.com/development/moving-files-from-one-git-repository-to-another-preserving-history/

<djensen47> Yeah, I was looking at that one too.

[adjourned]