Hi Gregory,
I like everything you proposed here. I would only add two things.
1) It would be nice to have issue-tracker issues handled by WG member
review like the sections of the draft. This way we ask at least two WG
members to volunteer to review each issue and provide a summary report
on their opinions on it. If need be the chairs could also appoint
someone to review if the chairs felt the volunteers didn't provide
enough balance.
2) I'm not sure your proposal requires bugzilla at all then. I think
the Wiki actually serves as a very good tool situated between the
issue-tracker on one side and the WG’s email, IRC and telecon
deliberations/discussions. I've tried to consistently setup each of
these issues I've raised to provide a quick mailto link to contribute
to the WG discussion and another quick email search link to find the
messages with that same subject. This provides a nice way to link the
wiki to the email discussions (I'm thinking of trying to do something
similar for IRC). Email and IRC provide a nice persistent log of the
discussions while the Wiki pages can evolve to reflect the feedback
and criticisms form the WG. The Issue-tracker then provides a nice
mechanism to stay on top of what's going on.
Other than those two points, I fully support your suggestion.
Take care,
Rob
On Jun 5, 2008, at 9:02 PM, Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:
aloha, josh!
my open question to/request of the chairs -- which i made sure was
logged
in IRC at today's telecon -- is as follows: when one opens an issue,
it is
not marked as "OPEN", but rather as "RAISED" -- can the chairs in
their
capacity as chairs, therefor, issue a formal statement to the effect
that:
* RAISED equals PROPOSED - proposal will be discussed on list and in
at least 1 telecon before marked as OPEN or quashed
* OPEN equals UNDER ACTIVE CONSIDERATION BY WG
* CLOSE equals Editors/Chairs consider issue resolved - note that
issues should be closed only after being addressed at a telecon, so
that if there is dissent over the resolution, it can be logged and
objectors should be given an opportunity to convince the chairs that
the issue should not be closed
or provide the rationale for not considering "RAISED" issues as
"PROPOSED"?
bugzilla could then be reserved for micro-issues and detailed
discussion
thereof, thus avoiding the bifurcation of feedback streams that using
bugzilla to propose issues would cause...
gregory
----------------------------------------------------------------
CONSERVATIVE, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils,
as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them
with others. -- Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory J. Rosmaita, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/index.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- Original Message -----------
From: Joshue O Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Steven Faulkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dan Connolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Laura Carlson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, James Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[email protected], Robert Burns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Gregory J.
Rosmaita"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:43:34 +0100
Subject: Re: discretion & the issue tracker (was Re: discretion in
adding
issues)
Steven Faulkner wrote:
Hi all,
Why can't there be a 'proposal tracker' implemented that is open to
anyone in the working group to add proposals to, via a form perhaps
that asks for certain information about the proposal, so it can then
be evaluated and debated by WG members?
That sounds like a good idea to me also.
Cheers
Josh
------- End of Original Message -------
