- From: Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:07:52 -0700
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi Antoine, Through a vote we decided to have issue tracking take place in the general DWBP issue tracker. With regards to how to report issues, it seemed as though the general consensus was to provide a reference to the person reporting the issue (including an email address) along with another reference to the person responsible for resolving the issue. I like your idea about citing the original email in the issue. Cheers, Eric On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the minutes! > And thanks Hadley for chairing and Eric for volunteering for the next one... > > I have one question on the minutes though: what has been decided for the > issue tracking? > I'm not sure I understand the problem about keeping track of the provenance > of comments, once we decide that the issues are connected to > > Personally I would use the good old practices from the first group I've been > into: > http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/IssuesProcess > > when we received comments, we indeed noted who sent them, but the most > adequate tracking was made by just making sure we would cite the original > email from the commenter on the public list: > http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/170 > > Actually I would recommend that only the editors would raise (in the sense > of 'creating the issue in the issue tracker') issues about the vocabulary > products, even if these issues are originally raised by someone else. > > Also, an issue should be raised only during a call. > > Cheers, > > Antoine > > On 6/12/14 7:07 PM, Hadley Beeman wrote: >> >> Thanks all, for a great discussion! >> >> Eric Stephan has agreed to chair the next one on the 26th. >> >> Minutes are here: http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-06-12 >> >> Cheers, >> >> Hadley > >
Received on Friday, 13 June 2014 00:08:19 UTC