Re: [hybi] Issue tracker

[Salvatore Loreto <[e-mail]>]

On 5/14/10 12:21 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Thu, 13 May 2010, Salvatore Loreto wrote:
>    
>> On 5/13/10 4:36 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>      
>>> On Wed, 12 May 2010, Salvatore Loreto wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> let me clarify about how we intend to work
>>>>
>>>> 1) Even if anyone is welcome to suggest issues,
>>>>      only the chairs are allowed to create a new issues!
>>>>
>>>> 2) We discuss the issues on the list for a while
>>>>
>>>> 3)  Issues related to WG documents will be initially
>>>>       assigned to one of the authors ( mainly because the tool allows to
>>>> enter
>>>>       only one assignee ).
>>>>
>>>> 4) the assignee (or the WG document authors) come up with a form of words
>>>> that
>>>>      they think matches the consensus and attach a diff to the trac
>>>>
>>>> 5) if there is a consensus on the text, the author will add it to the WG
>>>> document
>>>>      and the issues will be closed.
>>>>      if there is no consensus on the text go back to 4)
>>>>          
>>>
>>> That sounds like a huge amount of overhead. Here are the issues that I'm
>>> currently aware of for Web Sockets:
>>>
>>>      http://www.whatwg.org/issues/#websocket
>>>
>>> Do I need to send an e-mail for each one of these to raise it as an
>>> issue?
>>>        
>> If you really think that an issue is important and it is worth to
>> discuss it within the community, then you should send by mail to the
>> mailing list and ask to add it to the Issue tracker
>>      
> Could you give me some guidelines for how I should decide whether an issue
> should result in my following the process above or whether it should
> result in me just fixing the spec? The process you outline above doesn't
> seem to leave any room for me not raising issues. Should I raise all
> issues? If not, how should I determine what issues to raise?
>
>    

[Sal] As editor of the document you do not need to necessarily check all 
the details with the WG
before submit a new draft and its up to you judge what to do with each 
specific issue:
if you are confident that the way you are fixing the spec has the 
consensus (perhaps because it has
already been discussed) or it will receive the rough consensus from the 
wg, then go ahead and fix it;
if not it is better follow the process listed above.
Alternatively, if you are not sure you can also decide to go ahead with 
the fix you have in mind,
but you should mark it  properly in the draft with something like ISSUE 
or NewProposal or whatever
you find appropriate as maker.


Cheers
Sal

Salvatore Loreto
www.sloreto.com