[sipcore] Tracker Etiquette

[Adam Roach <[e-mail]>]

[as chair]

The issue tracker has been introduced without much in the way of 
guidelines. I think that, used correctly, it can be very useful for 
making sure specific issues don't get lost in the noise. It saves 
authors the work of exhaustively trawling the mailing list to make 
certain everything has been addressed.

However.

If we generate so many tickets that document authors spend more time 
closing tickets than actually fixing the document, then the tracker 
becomes a liability instead of an asset.

For right now, I'd like us to adjust how we deal with nits and editorial 
comments. For the most part, these should be sent to the list or 
directly to the author to be addressed (i.e., no need to open a ticket). 
Tracking these isn't important or even all that useful; if we miss one, 
then the paid RFC editor staff whose job it is to address these kinds of 
errors will probably catch it.

Larger or more structural issues can be entered into the tracker -- but 
please don't enter each such editorial comment into a new ticket. Gather 
all of your non-technical comments together, and put them in a single 
ticket.

Finally, it would be helpful to document authors if you included 
something in the ticket name that indicated which document the tracker 
issue is on. It doesn't have to be a whole document name; something like 
"4244bis" for the history-info draft would be sufficient.

Thank you.

/a