Re: [hybi] Issue tracker

[Ian Hickson <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, 13 May 2010, SM wrote:
> At 06:36 PM 5/12/2010, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > Doing so would likely take us ten times more time than just going ahead
> > and fixing the problems would.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> If there isn't consensus, the issue might be raised again and the fix 
> undone. It's going to take much more time and effort then.

If there's N issues, and it takes P time to walk each one through the 
proposed procedure plus Q time for the editor to do the edit, then it will 
take N*P+N*Q time to address the issues. However, if instead we just 
do the edits and only go through the procedure for controversial issues 
(issues where the change results in a request for a reversion of the 
change or where the resulting change is not satisfactory), and we assume 
that there's a fraction F of issues that are controversial, then it would 
take N*P+N*F*(Q+P) time.

This means it's more efficient to use this "escalation" process rather 
than putting everything through the heavy-weight process if F is less
than 1/(P/Q+1), which, assuming the fraction of controversial issues is 
less than 80% and the time for the editor to edit the spec is on average 
60 minutes, is true for any value of P greater than about 4 hours, which 
seems quite low given the proposed process.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'