W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > April to June 2012

RE: Proposed clarification to our issues process

From: Wei, James <james.wei@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 00:46:53 +0000
To: olivier Thereaux <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>
CC: Audio Working Group <public-audio@w3.org>
Message-ID: <668CBE60026FE04AB5523C7C3CCB00F810C5CB@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Will it be better to let the one who raised the issue to close it? and the issue will be closed automatically if it is under Pending Review status for several weeks. 

Best Regards 


-----Original Message-----
From: olivier Thereaux [mailto:olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 7:05 PM
To: robert@ocallahan.org
Cc: Audio Working Group
Subject: Re: Proposed clarification to our issues process

On 22 May 2012, at 11:07, Robert O'Callahan wrote:

> I hope that most of the issues raised recently can be resolved without discussion. So, personally I think it would be fine if the editor (or his delegate(s)) simply checked in a change to the spec and moved the issue directly from Raised to Closed, preferably with a link to the Mercurial changeset that resolves the issue. If the change is not acceptable then someone can reopen the issue (I assume).

Entirely agree on the fact that Raised->Open->Pending Review can be done in a matter of minutes by the editor if the resolution is just a matter of fixing a paragraph in the spec. 

I'm still rather keen on making sure there is some kind of group review, even short, before the issue can be closed, though.

Received on Monday, 28 May 2012 00:47:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:49:59 UTC