- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 13:21:28 -0800
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Geoffrey Sneddon <gsneddon@opera.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
On Dec 7, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: > The biggest problem is the concept of counter-proposal. > > Change proposals came out of the Issue tracker, and had life in the > beginning as a bug at some point. > > A change proposal is a person saying, OK, this is the change I want. > It starts life as a bug request. The editor doesn't like it, won't > make the change, so it has been upped to an issue. The Change Proposal > was a requirement from us specifying what action we want taken to > satisfy the issue, the rationale for it, and the detailed changes. > > Where this counter-proposal came from, I have no idea. It is not part > of the formal Change Control procedure, or at least I can't find it. > > In the procedure, there is discussion for each Change Proposal, and > the person can modify it for a reasonable period of time, hopefully to > get consensus. But there is nothing about formal counter-proposals. In > fact, these are NOT part of the initial change control process we all > agreed on. > > Sorry, but it seems to me that those who want change are having to go > through a lot more hoops than those who the status quo. The whole point of asking for a counter-proposal in this case was to equalize the hoop jumping. I don't think we've asked Tab to do any less work than Manu. And I don't think sticking with mailing list discussion of Manu's proposal would have been as fair, to either side. Regards, Maciej
Received on Monday, 7 December 2009 21:22:09 UTC