Remove mentions of when various groups were created #420
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
what am I missing? the Git diff seems to show no difference... |
It shows a difference here: lines 556 and 614 are deleted (and the first word in the subsequent line is capitalized) |
|
The Revising W3C Process CG just discussed The full IRC log of that discussion<fantasai> Topic: PRs<dsinger_> Editor’s start on the cleanup, pull requests, and so on. <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pulls> etc. <fantasai> florian: Many are old, and some of them like registries, don't make sense to discuss on the fly <fantasai> florian: Gratuitous mentions of Directors, though, I think it's clean. <fantasai> florian: I would like to merge <fantasai> florian: Don't want this to drag on for weeks/month, it's a lot of work to rebase that branch every time we change something else <fantasai> dsinger_: OK, explicit request to everyone to review this PR, make sure it doesn't change the sense of the Process <fantasai> florian: Meant to do two things. <fantasai> florian: Some places where Process says "Director decides X", and then references 'Director's decision'. Just removing tha mention of Director <fantasai> florian: Then others where "Director announces" <fantasai> florian: Doesn't need to be Director, so switching to Team <fantasai> s/tha /that second/ <fantasai> jeff: Reviewing right now <tantek> Just reviewed in GH <fantasai> dsinger_: Not going to execute this PR this week, good to do next week <fantasai> jeff: Agree we should pull gratuitous mentions <fantasai> jeff: 2nd one (quotes text) <fantasai> jeff: You're removing because by definition, Director resolves the FO? <fantasai> florian: right <fantasai> https://github.com//pull/254 <florian> github: https://github.com//pull/420 <fantasai> githb: none <jeff> q+ |
tantek
approved these changes
Jul 15, 2020
|
The Revising W3C Process CG just discussed
The full IRC log of that discussion<fantasai> Topic: Another PR<fantasai> github: https://github.com//pull/420 <fantasai> jeff: General obsevation, maybe group editorial fixes into one PR to review as a set? <fantasai> florian: Maybe, but then again for DF, I did this 1.5 yrs ago, and the fact that it was being massive delayed it being reviewed. <jeff> [another time, other considerations] <fantasai> dsinger: Thisseems trivial <fantasai> florian: Since ppl say Process is too long, mentioning when AB and TAG were created seems unnecessary <fantasai> fantasai: let's accept <fantasai> RESOLVED: Accept PR <dsinger_> github: https://github.com//pull/274 <fantasai> github: https://github.com//pull/420 |
frivoal
added
the
Closed: Accepted
frivoal
added
the
DoC
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We're trying to make the process simpler and shorter and more understandable. The removals proposed in this PR are tiny, but I don't think these pieces of text brought any value at all to the process.
Groups are welcome to document their history, but the Process isn't the place for that.