From: Allen Wirfs-Brock [mailto:al...@wirfs-brock.com]
> However, that is a lot of infrastructure work and I don’t think we should let
>it to get in the way of shipping our first yearly update.
Thanks for pointing this out. I agree that we may be over-optimistic in
thinking the new tooling wil
> On Apr 8, 2015, at 12:19 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
>
> This was discussed briefly at the previous meeting, perhaps un-minuted.
>
> The basic plan is to develop the spec on GitHub, using [Ecmarkup][] and
> [Ecmarkdown][]. It will take pull requests, have a master branch that you can
> view
From: es-discuss [mailto:es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Michael
Dyck
> So not as git branches of the spec?
I mean, I guess they could if they want, but that seems like a lot of work for
the spec writer to be constantly rebasing. Better to only do the branch when
it's time for a p
Michael Dyck wrote:
Unlike the current process, the post-ES2015 spec process requires two
shipping implementations before a feature is integrated into the spec.
While we're waiting for that, we anticipate proposal documents to
prepare for integration by being written as Ecmarkup/Ecmarkdown spec
d
On 15-04-08 12:19 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
This was discussed briefly at the previous meeting, perhaps un-minuted.
The meeting notes for Jan 29th have a section where ecmarkup/down is
introduced and discussed somewhat, but there's no decision regarding its use.
The basic plan is to develop
This was discussed briefly at the previous meeting, perhaps un-minuted.
The basic plan is to develop the spec on GitHub, using [Ecmarkup][] and
[Ecmarkdown][]. It will take pull requests, have a master branch that you can
view (and implementers should view, to see any bug fixes made since the Ec
6 matches
Mail list logo
