Re: spec issue tracker

Hi Erik,

> @2008-11-27 12:46 -0800:
>  good to see we already have one and I think I have such an account already. 
>  but I think it only makes sense to use it if there is consensus that this is 
>  how issues are tracked and archived.

Actually, I think it can make sense to use it without necessarily
having a process discussion and trying to get consensus about
exactly how it should be used. And regardless, it certainly need
not be the sole means use for issue tracking. In the HTML WG,
we've found good use both for the W3C bugzilla and the W3C Tracker:

  http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/

Tracker has some IRC-integration and e-mail-integration features
that the W3C bugzilla lacks, but it also requires that anybody
using it must be a member of whatever working group a particular
instance of it has been set up for. So it's not really an optimal
means for facilitating or tracking issues submitted by anyone
who's not a member of the group.

In the HTML WG, we use the Tracker to track high-level issues (in
particular, issues that have been brought to our attention by
other working groups), and we use bugzilla as a convenient means
for anyone (including people who are not members of the HTML WG
not members of any W3C working group) to submit spec bugs or
proposals and to have a familiar sort of self-service means for
being able to track the progress of the issues they submit.

>  otherwise we just introduce something that's probably mostly
>  write-only and not a reliable source of information.

The only thing I can say about that is, you won't really know
unless you try it. If it gets some initial use and it seems like
it's working out well for whatever purpose it ends up being put
too, then great. If it doesn't, then I don't think there will be
anybody requiring or expecting that the group keep using it.

  --Mike

-- 
Michael(tm) Smith
http://people.w3.org/mike/

Received on Friday, 28 November 2008 06:15:50 UTC