Commit notifications for specs

Toni Ruottu toni.ruottu at
Tue Apr 29 13:45:26 PDT 2008

> you specifically *don't* want specifications to fork and be worked on 
> randomly; there is a low rate of edit conflict; having a clearly canonical 
> version is critical ....

Ok. It may be that dvcs would we a wrong solution for a real problem.
What I'm really concerned about is how hard it is currently to get stuff
done. I had the new clipboard specification ready in November and I
still haven't got the old ones replaced with the new one.

A partial and acceptable reason for this is that Untz has been cleaning
up fd.o. This might improve the situation in future. The clipboard
specification currently exists in four places cvs, wiki, web folder and
the mailing list where I first posted it (because I don't have cvs

This experience makes me think that having the new one in my own branch
in a dvcs might not be that bad. I wonder, if it is currently typical to
use specification drafts from mailing list archive rather than the ones
published more officially on the site.

I really do hope there would be _one_ place where the information was
easily accessible to anyone and I also hope anyone would be invited to
work on it. After listening to dvcs market speeches by Torvalds and
Shuttleworth, I'd assume such a tool might make working together a bit
easier. Using such a tool is, however less important than actually
getting stuff done.


More information about the xdg mailing list