search

w3c / vc-use-cases

Verifiable Credentials Use Cases
https://w3c.github.io/vc-use-cases/
Other
50 stars 22 forks source link

Cleanup index.html v2 #115

Closed stonematt closed 5 years ago

stonematt commented 5 years ago

Repeating much of the work from PR #111

Preview | Diff

stonematt commented 5 years ago

@TallTed I tried to do a big cleanup. mostly white space. my eyes are crossed...

stonematt commented 5 years ago

@ken-ebert I copied the block of content about devices from PR #111 to PR #115 . that should catch your changes.

stonematt commented 5 years ago

@ken-ebert and @TallTed I think this is ready to pull in. will you give me a final thumbs up. post merge, if there are a few remaining issues, we'll grab them quick.

stonematt commented 5 years ago

@TallTed and @ken-ebert I'm looking for feedback on which PR to focus on. PR #115 was branched off of the closest gh-pages after the merge that blew up PR #111. I added Ken's content on the Devices use case which resolves missing content, if there was any. Did PR#116 give us a headstart? It looks like it made more work, but I don't know how to read it. I propose we move forward w/ PR #115, close the other 2 and if necessary, do a second clean up pass, if we decide we have time.

TallTed commented 5 years ago

@stonematt - I would prefer to focus on #111, because I know that all my fixes (which were not just whitespace) are in there, and I believe I merged in, if not all, at least all the significant, fixes from #115. Of course, that was before the last several commits to #115.

If #115 hadn't been created, I would have gone back to #111 last week, done a character-level local comparison of each section of conflict with the upstream, and brought it back ready to merge (modulo any further changes to the upstream). That would have taken a day or two's focused work, and would have been a better timesink than the cross-comparison with #115, which was necessary because of the other changes made there, and is no longer complete since the last several commits to #115.

116 was an experiment, trying to merge #111 into #115 towards merge of #115 into upstream, and hoping to have fewer upstream conflicts; that appears not to have been a success.

All that said, if we just pick one, I'll hammer on it. I can't give a firm time estimate, and probably won't have it done before tomorrow's scheduled call, but will try.

stonematt commented 5 years ago

@TallTed you pick and I'll stop interfering.

TallTed commented 5 years ago

handled through #111