Re: Milestones

Great. Let's use "Ready for Editing" as a marker for things that are obvious and ready to hit the spec if there are no further comments. 

.            .       .    .  . ...Joe

Joe Berkovitz
President
Noteflight LLC
+1 978 314 6271
www.noteflight.com
"Your music, everywhere."

> On Oct 20, 2014, at 6:05 PM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
> 
> That's fine with me too.  I've been marking things as "ready for editing" if I think they're obvious enough to write up, and "ready for review" if there's already a PR for them.
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Joseph Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> wrote:
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> Although… Matt and I were thinking that this sort of case should be flagged as TPAC 2014, actually, because we were hoping to plow through and approve many “easy clarification” issues like this at the meeting and we didn’t want to assume that everyone would agree on what was easy or what the wording change should be.  A bunch of these small, noncontroversial clarifications of this type have already been tagged in this way.
>> 
>> On the other hand, we don’t want to take up a lot of everyone’s time on this at the F2F.
>> 
>> Perhaps we could address this via a speedy process at the F2F — by avoiding read through of trivial clarification issues at the meeting, then if no one offers comment on an issue, we can immediately mark it as “make this edit to the spec later” and move on.
>> 
>> Thoughts welcomed on this subject.
>> 
>> .            .       .    .  . ...Joe
>> 
>> Joe Berkovitz
>> President
>> 
>> Noteflight LLC
>> Boston, Mass.
>> phone: +1 978 314 6271
>> www.noteflight.com
>> "Your music, everywhere"
>> 
>>> On Oct 20, 2014, at 5:28 PM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> For that issue in particular, I'd just intended to express that this should get clarified before LC is issued.  I don't think it needs face-to-face discussion (i.e. I doubt it's particularly controversial).
>>> 
>>> There used to be two v1 milestones, PLUS the last call milestone - I moved all issues filed under one of them to the other and deleted the unused one last week.  LC is just "I don't think we can issue a last call until this is resolved."  If you'd rather delineate just along V1/vNext lines and make LC a label, that's okay with me.
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Joseph Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> I noticed #356 was added to the “Web Audio Last Call 1” milestone a few hours back.
>>>> 
>>>> To mark bugs for discussion next week Matt and I are trying to stick with a single tag: “V1 (TPAC 2014)". For clarity, to include a bug in the TPAC discussion, we’re asking folks to please use the TPAC 2014 tag rather than a milestone designation. There appear to be two similarly named milestones for v1 and we’ve never had a chance to discuss their meaning.
>>>> 
>>>> (On the other hand if you didn’t want to include this particular issue in the F2F discussion, then please disregard this note!)
>>>> 
>>>> I hope this doesn’t seem overly fussy. (Want to compare tattoos?)
>>>> 
>>>> .            .       .    .  . ...Joe
>>>> 
>>>> Joe Berkovitz
>>>> President
>>>> 
>>>> Noteflight LLC
>>>> Boston, Mass.
>>>> phone: +1 978 314 6271
>>>> www.noteflight.com
>>>> "Your music, everywhere"
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>