Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merge bikeshed or die. #15

Open
scheib opened this issue Aug 7, 2015 · 4 comments
Open

Merge bikeshed or die. #15

scheib opened this issue Aug 7, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

@scheib
Copy link

scheib commented Aug 7, 2015

WebBluetoothCG#150 is a major spec refactor. Either a heavy merge of the implementation notes in https://github.com/WebBluetoothChrome/web-bluetooth needs to be done, or we should decide that it is not worth it.

What do you think @g-ortuno @jyasskin ?

@jyasskin
Copy link
Member

jyasskin commented Aug 7, 2015

My instinct is to take the implementation notes and re-apply them to the new spec, rather than trying to merge the new-spec over the implementation notes. This will also fix bad merges like #14.

@scheib
Copy link
Author

scheib commented Aug 7, 2015

Yes - re-apply is the only sane approach. This is sort of a call for "does the team want to continue with this implementation document approach?". So, what's the call on that? And if you're supportive, any chance you want to do the text shoveling, jyasskin@ ? :)

@jyasskin
Copy link
Member

jyasskin commented Aug 8, 2015

I can do the text shoveling. Whether it's useful is more a question for you and @g-ortuno. As the spec changes, I assume your merges into this document point out bits of the implementation that need to change. Has that been useful? If so, we should keep this.

@g-ortuno
Copy link

I think it is. Specially now that there have been so many small changes to the API since we implemented it e.g. throw error for no services.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants