Re: What is the path forward on BP scoping and comments?

Hi Eric,

I've really appreciated the discussions too, but I agree with you that it
is important to know how to move on.

If I understood correctly from what Phil said in the last meeting, we need
to have a consensus before publishing the FPWD. @Phil, please let us know
if this is correct.

I don't know if the editors can make a decision about the scope (I think it
could be nice to reach consensus in the group). Maybe, one of the chairs or
Phil could explain this to us.

I like the idea of putting the issues directly in the draft as a remark
that we still need to reach consensus, but I don't know if this is enough
for the FPWD.

Thanks!
Bernadette

2014-12-17 11:12 GMT-03:00 Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've really appreciated the exchange of ideas and concerns.   Not wanting
> the BP editors and contributors to lose momentum, what is the path forward?
>
> Do we as a working group need to reach consensus?
> Do the editors make the decision about scoping?
>
> If a consensus is required, do we want to spend the remaining time this
> week putting forward proposals for the call?
>
> If consensus is not required, do the editors have enough input from the
> working group to make a decision on scoping?
>
> One possible path forward is just putting in Issues directly in the draft
> document and moving on for the time being.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric S
>


-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------