Re: [pg] Review of profile guidance issues

Antoine - the lack of an ability to comment on parts of an issue is 
definitely a problem with github issues. I could re-create the document 
as a Google doc or a Hackmd.io doc, where comments are possible.

Yes, this is just an effort to clean things up before moving the issues 
to a new repo for Profiles Guidance.

I'm not sure what you mean by
 > I don't want to move closed tickets to a new github space, but at least
 > the WG should be ready to accept that a ticket from a non-PG repo could
 > be still used as rationale for the PG effort.

If you mean that issues in the general DXWG repo could be used by the PG 
group, then I don't think there's anything so formal that ties issues to 
outputs so that shouldn't be a problem.

kc

On 6/15/21 11:52 AM, Antoine Isaac wrote:
> Hi Karen, all
> 
> I am ashamed that I couldn't reply earlier, and will probably struggle 
> to find time to work on the document...
> 
> In any case I think Karen's list is a great start and it provides a 
> process and categories that I think we can follow. Thanks!
> 
> This said I am not sure how to discuss the groupings themselves. I start 
> to post comments in the new ticket #1366 with remarks like "I agree that 
> #989 shouldn't be worked on, but that's because I believe it can be 
> closed, not because I think it's out of scope" this is going to be hard 
> to follow, isn't it?
> 
> By the way this comment begs for a methodology check: we're only looking 
> at moving open issues in the DXWG repo, aren't we?
> I mean, there are closed issues that probably played a big role for 
> defining the current draft [1] and the google docs around it. If we lose 
> track of them we may re-invent the wheel, or trash bits of text that 
> were once judged important following a discussion.
> I don't want to move closed tickets to a new github space, but at least 
> the WG should be ready to accept that a ticket from a non-PG repo could 
> be still used as rationale for the PG effort.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Antoine
> 
> [1] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/profiles/
> 
> On 19/05/2021 22:43, Karen Coyle wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I took an action to find out if those of us potentially working on the 
>> profile guidance document would like our own github repo at this 
>> point. This would mean copying over the issues from the main repo to a 
>> PG repo. I'm assuming that having a separate repo would be a good 
>> idea, but I also think that it makes sense to review the issues and 
>> remove any that we don't want to move over. Therefore, I have created 
>> a first issue about issues:
>>
>> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1366
>>
>> These have my initial assessments, and it is all open to discussion.
>>
>> If this works as a way to winnow down the issues before moving them, I 
>> will do the remainder. This is only about 1/3 of the 90 issues that 
>> are marked at PG, but we can remove others after they are moved to a 
>> new repo. My idea here is to get rid of the ones that are obviously 
>> not in scope. It's a step we would have to take anyway.
>>
>> Please give your assessments of these issues.
> 

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net
http://kcoyle.net

Received on Wednesday, 16 June 2021 16:36:46 UTC