Wiki and drafts

What was Harmonious prospectively can still be Harmonious in ES6 (as in 
ES5, remember, Harmony started in July 2008). The wiki harmony: 
namespace remains.

I agree with the idea already in practice that Rick cited. Big note/link 
at top, leave the harmony: proposal as it was for historical purposes.

We can certainly clean out the harmony: namespace of ES6 proposals, but 
more when ES6 is "done" -- IMHO. Thoughts?

/be

Brandon Benvie wrote:
> My understanding is that "harmony" refers perpetually to ES-next, 
> whatever that thing is at the time. Since ES6 now has a name and a 
> (draft) spec, it no longer is harmony (it's ES6). The wiki doesn't 
> reflect this, but this is what (I think) I have observed from what 
> TC39 members have said.
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Domenic Denicola 
> <domenic at domenicdenicola.com <mailto:domenic at domenicdenicola.com>> wrote:
>
>     I think part of the confusion is that, from what I understand,
>     "harmony" refers to things that are agreed upon by all TC39
>     members, or at least were at one time. But this does /not/ imply
>     it being in ES6.
>
>     That is, much confusion I've seen on the internet stems from
>     people assuming "harmony" means ES6, since for so long we were
>     calling it "ECMAScript Harmony."
>
>     I'd suggest either downgrading non-ES6 proposals to strawman, or
>     creating a new "es6" namespace and moving the relevant pages
>     there. The former is probably very appropriate for things that
>     were once harmonious, but now contentious or obsoleted by other
>     features.
>
>     --
>
>     Of course, the actual solution for all this is for me to launch a
>     bunch of pull requests against Dave's new wiki, giving it the same
>     breadth and depth as the current one. Then we can point the
>     internet to that as the authoritative source of information, with
>     the current wiki used more as a scratchpad or historical archive.
>     I'll try to re-shuffle my to-do list...
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* es-discuss-bounces at mozilla.org
>     <mailto:es-discuss-bounces at mozilla.org>
>     [es-discuss-bounces at mozilla.org
>     <mailto:es-discuss-bounces at mozilla.org>] on behalf of Rick Waldron
>     [waldron.rick at gmail.com <mailto:waldron.rick at gmail.com>]
>     *Sent:* Friday, January 18, 2013 13:20
>     *To:* David Bruant
>     *Cc:* Brendan Eich; es-discuss Steen
>     *Subject:* Re: Wiki and drafts (was: Polyfill for Maps and Sets)
>
>     Cool, check this:
>     https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-January/028270.html
>     :)
>
>     That's not all of them, but I'll go through it all again for
>     anything I missed (unless you want to list any here, which would
>     be fantastic)
>
>
>     Rick
>
>
>     On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:08 PM, David Bruant <bruant.d at gmail.com
>     <mailto:bruant.d at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Le 18/01/2013 18:58, Rick Waldron a écrit :
>
>             It doesn't seem reasonable to maintain two versions of the
>             proposals as they become specifications.
>
>             My first thought is that the simplest possible strategy is
>             to update harmony proposal pages (on the wiki) with a line
>             at the top that indicates that the proposal is now in the
>             spec draft. This is low effort-cost to convey that
>             everyone should be looking at the latest and greatest of
>             each proposal as they become part of the ES6 draft
>             revisions and progress towards finalization therein.
>
>         I fully agree. It'll bring more attention to what happens in
>         the drafts and will make more people to review them.
>         Also, if something in the harmony namespace is put on hold
>         like harmony:classes it should probably be downgraded to the
>         strawman namespace.
>
>         David
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     es-discuss mailing list
>     es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
>     https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:

> What was Harmonious prospectively can still be Harmonious in ES6 (as in
> ES5, remember, Harmony started in July 2008). The wiki harmony: namespace
> remains.
>
> I agree with the idea already in practice that Rick cited. Big note/link
> at top, leave the harmony: proposal as it was for historical purposes.
>
> We can certainly clean out the harmony: namespace of ES6 proposals, but
> more when ES6 is "done" -- IMHO. Thoughts?
>

I agree with waiting until ES6 is "done". When the spec is published, the
harmony:proposals that are in that published document can be safely
archived (or whatever the process is for the wiki) without creating chaos
for Allen during the process.

Rick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130118/25118ca1/attachment.html>