W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > June 2008

Re: discretion & the issue tracker (was Re: discretion in adding issues)

From: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:02:32 +0200
Cc: www-archive@w3.org, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C0CBE1B8-0CD4-4B58-806F-13DD90AB5C5B@robburns.com>
To: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>

Hi James,

On Jun 5, 2008, at 2:20 PM, James Graham wrote:

>> HI Mike,
>> I think the reason you're having such difficulty communicating here,
>
> I've been following this discussion closely since I need to be aware  
> of the best-practice for using the tracker. It strikes me that Mike  
> has been extremely clear about how the issue tracker is to be used,  
> and I would like to thank him for taking the time to make it  
> explicit. Mike, could you perhaps add a note to the tracker page  
> itself or to the WG home page summarizing the correct use of the  
> tracker so that everyone is aware of how it is to be used going  
> forward? I appreciate you have already spent some considerable time  
> on this issue, but since the issue tracker has slightly different  
> operating procedures from a typical bug database I can foresee this  
> issue arising again.

I understand the purpose of the issue tracker. I understand what Mike  
wrote now on the HTML WG home page. What I still don't understand —  
and what I was referring to about Mike having trouble communicating —  
is how any of the issues I asked Gregory to add to the issue tracker  
do not meet the criteria Mike has laid out. If you or Mike or whoever  
doesn't agree with the issues I raised, then by all means raise  
specific objections on the HTML WG list. But please stop making these  
pseudo procedural arguments here when it is clear you have no leg to  
stand on.

>> While I think everyone in the WG welcomes your enthusiasm — it’s  
>> great  to have a staff contact take such a close interest in the  
>> daily  activities of the WG — you're clearly overstepping your  
>> bounds in  suggesting the WG wants you to delete these issues from  
>> the issue- tracker. What the WG wants from you is to dutifully  
>> serve as a staff  contact to the W3C, to serve as a liaison between  
>> the WG and the W3C  and to help us all understand the procedures  
>> within which we're  supposed to work.
>
> Robert, I really think it is inappropriate for you to presume to  
> speak for the whole working group when you are not communicating an  
> actual working group decision.

I never said I spoke for the whole WG. Again why don't you state  
specifically what you disagree with rather than claiming I'm speaking  
for the entire WG when I'm clearly not in any position to do so.  
Certainly no one active in the WG would make the mistake of thinking I  
was speaking for the whole WG.

> Speaking purely for myself, I am happy to see Mike taking in active  
> role in managing the HTMLWG community and I hope his efforts will  
> result in a more coordinated group and better signal/noise for those  
> trying to follow the discussions.

Isn't that what I already said. I just provided Mike some guidance on  
how to better accomplish his goals.

Take care,
Rob
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2008 14:04:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:18 GMT