W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2011

RE: Handling of non-escalated pre-Last Call bugs

From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:52:33 +0000
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Message-ID: <E3EACD022300B94D88613639CF4E25F818654AEB@TK5EX14MBXC132.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
> Converting them to comments, what does that mean?

I never said anything about "comments".  We plan to convert the identified Bugzilla entries so their Component values [1] no longer are prefaced with "pre-LC1 " which effectively turns them in Last Call bugs. 

> What about bugs we file from now on, will all them be comments and the respective editor not required to work on them?

All bugs filed since Oct 1 have been created using the Component values which make them Last Call bugs.  This procedure was described in our timeline to Last Call email [1].  So the Chairs are now proposing to treat these non-escalated pre-LC bugs as if they had been filed after Oct 1.

In addition Editors are actively processing Last Call bugs as indicated by the "LC Bugs by State and Age" statistics on Sam's WG summary status page at [3].

The Chairs will respond separately to your advice on the handling of individual bugs.

/paulc

[1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/describecomponents.cgi?product=HTML%20WG 
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0074.html 
[3] http://intertwingly.net/tmp/wgstatus.html 

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329


-----Original Message-----
From: Leif Halvard Silli [mailto:xn--mlform-iua@målform.no] 
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 6:58 AM
To: Paul Cotton
Cc: public-html@w3.org; Sam Ruby; Maciej Stachowiak
Subject: Re: Handling of non-escalated pre-Last Call bugs

Paul Cotton, Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:37:10 +0000:
> There are 11 pre-Last Call bugs that were re-opened but never 
> escalated into WG issues by the Jan 22 deadline [1].  See the Bugzilla 
> query: http://tinyurl.com/6dvhs5s
> 
> This is a warning that the WG co-chairs plan to convert these bugs to 
> Last Call bugs by changing the Component field of each of these bugs.
> 
> Please let us know if anyone has a reason why we should not convert 
> these bugs to Last Call bugs.

Converting them to comments, what does that mean? That the respective editor is less obliged to work on them? What about bugs we file from now on, will all them be comments and the respective editor not required to work on them?

> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0074.html

Regarding those that I feel relates to myself:

Bug 9965: Eliot has corrected it (but failed to say it in the bug (yet).
Bug 10788, about @srcdoc, relates to bug 9965. No reason to track.
Bug 10618: I just asked the editor to do what I said he was willing to do.

Bug 10518: I think is bug should be linked to ISSUE-157.
--
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 27 January 2011 16:53:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:22 UTC