- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 06:30:40 +0200
- To: Michael Champion <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>, W3C Process CG <public-w3process@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
> Le 20 mai 2019 à 22:45, Michael Champion <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com> a écrit : > > A few thoughts: > > Florian, this is a great start, thanks! But what's the priority for the CG to deliberate? It might be: > 1. Get a Repository mechanism in the Process > 2. Get an Evergreen option of some sort in the Process > 3. Get a Director-free model into the Process > > Do we try to do all this for Process 2020? Or defer 3 until Process 2021 (when presumably there is a Board of Directors to give some Director roles to). > > That said, my personal interest is 3 > 2 > 1. I'd be OK with skipping Process 2020 and using the saved effort to ensure that Process 2021 accomplishes them all. Unless of course we could quickly agree on solutions for 1 and 2, but I'm not optimistic. One of the reasons why the W3C must change and drives so many irrelevance criticisms is that the Process takes eons to change. We are able, in theory and some may say in theory only, to update in a few months a technical document potentially impacting a large part of the world's population. But it rarely takes less than 18 months to update the Process, a document impacting a few hundred organizations and people. We're slow, we're so slow, we're so damn slow... 2021 is one tech generation away. The first discussions about this necessary change happened a DECADE ago, and it's a wide consensus that we can't continue with the current directorial situation. The target should be 2020-01-01. </Daniel>
Received on Tuesday, 21 May 2019 04:31:17 UTC