[Bug 8896] Clarify that anyone who is dissatisfied with a bug resolution may reopen or escalate

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8896





--- Comment #4 from Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  2010-03-11 02:59:41 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> 
> > I agree it would be good to document these, though it seems like a separate
> > issue from the original substance of this bug.
> 
> cf "Do working group members watch bug fixes and then open new bugs?" 
> 
> The substance of the bug was to insure responses to comments come "from the
> working group" and not just "from the editor", even when allowing a
> fast-tracking situation where the bugs get resolved and closed without any
> explicit discussion.
> 
> Not everyone on the working group has the bandwidth or interest to monitor
> these real time anyway.

I agree. I suspect there are currently no people besides me attempting to
review every single bug that gets resolved, and even my own monthly review is
not very thorough. Realistically, the gating factor here is that, at least
since August 2009, we have had 200-300 incoming bugs and 200-300 resolved bugs
a month. I would guess few people have the bandwidth to follow along. However,
many people do seem to follow their own bugs, or ones they get Cc'd on, or ones
they hear about. When the originator (or anyone else) thinks a bug is of
particular interest 

BTW here are some monthly bug stats I extracted from bugzilla, this is my basis
for the claim about in/out rates:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AoCAfo_LQ5_kdFFWWmpCMWxsLUN2TW9VYi1uNEJGenc&hl=en


> > "You can regularly do a bugzilla search query for bugs that have moved to
> state RESOLVED in some period of time ... monthly bug stats..."
> 
> Easy-to-find canned queries linked from the working group "How to participate"
> instructions, with an explicit note about how to re-open or escalate something
> if you disagree, etc.  sounds like it might do it.

Good idea. Here is a query that I believe will find all bugs resolved in the
past 30 days (from whenever it gets run - it uses relative dates) in the HTML
WGs drafts. Testing would be appreciated:

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=HTML+WG&component=HTML%2BRDFa+%28editor%3A+Manu+Sporny%29&component=HTML5+differences+from+HTML4+%28editor%3A+Anne+van+Kesteren%29&component=HTML5+spec+bugs&component=HTML5+spec+proposals&component=HTML5%3A+The+Markup+Language+%28editor%3A+Michael%28tm%29+Smith%29&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=CLOSED&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=-30d&chfieldto=Now&chfield=bug_status&chfieldvalue=RESOLVED&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=

Shorter URL for the above: http://tinyurl.com/yj2ajrl

> I would think you might want to add some preconditions around reopening things
> rather than escalating, though.

Not sure I follow. What kind of preconditions do you have in mind?


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Thursday, 11 March 2010 02:59:44 UTC