W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2009

Re: reasonable length of time before bugs in bugzilla database are addressed

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 10:10:46 -0800
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <74B0C4BB-7712-4F99-95CB-74B546948ED9@apple.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Hi Ian & Shelley,

Let's not fight over blame or needle each other, but rather look for  
constructive ways to make good progress. In particular:

=> At this time it does not look to me like editorial actions by Ian  
are the long pole on getting to last call. Our oldest open bug is much  
more recent than our oldest open issue.

=> It looks like we now have a process with a good chance of getting  
the open issues resolved. Let's give it a chance to work.

=> If the chairs at some future point conclude that resolving bugs is  
the bottleneck, we will address the issue.

Regards,
Maciej

On Dec 10, 2009, at 9:56 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Shelley Powers wrote:
>>
>> With Ian's commitments to so many specifications, we need to consider
>> starting off next year with a discussion about adding a couple of new
>> editors, to help ease the burden placed on one man.
>
> If anyone would like to edit anything, I'm more than happy to help  
> getting
> people up to speed. There are literally dozens of critical specs in  
> the
> Web standards space that desperately need more editors. So yes,  
> please, if
> you can bring in more editors, do so.
>
> I work on the number of specs that is necessary to make good  
> progress on
> all of the specs that I work on. This is why, for instance, I stay on
> schedule -- back in 2006 (before the W3C started work on HTML5), I
> predicted that we would reach zero open issues in the WHATWG in  
> October
> 2009, and that is exactly what happened. Meanwhile, the W3C HTML WG  
> was
> formed with the charter stating that Last Call (zero issues) would be
> reached in June 2008 -- at which point the HTMLWG's issue tracker was
> still more than a year from reaching its peak of open issues. So the
> numbers don't suggest that I'm overwhelmed with work, they suggest the
> HTML WG is overwhelmed with work.
>
> (I already said all this here:
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Dec/0195.html
> ...but you didn't reply, and instead just repeated your statement  
> again.
> I would appreciate it if we as a working group could rely on people  
> not
> repeating arguments after they've already been responded to, without
> acknowledging those responses and adjusting the arguments  
> accordingly.)
>
> -- 
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                ) 
> \._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _ 
> \  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'-- 
> (,_..'`-.;.'
>
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 18:11:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:55 UTC