XDG specs migrated to git
notmart at gmail.com
Tue Jan 11 12:19:08 PST 2011
On Tuesday 11 January 2011, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 11, 2011, Marco Martin wrote:
> > just for the record.. ask to who?
> freeedesktop.org ..
> > also, I would like an agreed way to proceed for proposed specifications,
> > like
> > * everybody free to make branches
> > * one branch per proposed specification (or proposed new version of an
> > existing specification)
> > * merged in master once agreed upon
> i don't know if it needs to be "once agreed upon" since that begs the
> question "who counts towards agreement"?
yeah, tricky question indeed, from what i see this step never was really
> so while i agree with your suggested workflow in general, i suggest we
> define "agreed upon" as meaning "at least the first actual release of the
> spec with at least one production implementation". thoughts?
that could be nice, either one fully working or two with the second at least
I think is important to agree when one can be considered "real" also for some
quite pratic implications: for instance if the spec talks about a DBUS
interface, when becomes acceptable that implementations take the
org.freedesktop.foo bus name..
The implementations of StatusNotifierItem for instance still have
org.kde.StatusNotifierItem: (they really should switch to org.freedesktop by
now, modulo the funny retrocompatibility issues that such a move will imply)
More information about the xdg