W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2009

Re: reasonable length of time before bugs in bugzilla database are addressed

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:17:11 -0600
Message-ID: <643cc0270912101017j7dc897d9tecfa8ce2de7ecb5@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> Hi Ian & Shelley,
> Let's not fight over blame or needle each other, but rather look for
> constructive ways to make good progress. In particular:
> => At this time it does not look to me like editorial actions by Ian are the
> long pole on getting to last call. Our oldest open bug is much more recent
> than our oldest open issue.
> => It looks like we now have a process with a good chance of getting the
> open issues resolved. Let's give it a chance to work.
> => If the chairs at some future point conclude that resolving bugs is the
> bottleneck, we will address the issue.
> Regards,
> Maciej

That's an excellent response, Maciej. And very good points.

I also agree that the Change Process should help, and will try to
practice patience. I believe one area where Ian and I agree is we're
both anxious to see HTML5 progress, and that can make me, at least,

It's time to turn my attention to other things for a time.

Thanks, much, and Happy Holidays.


> On Dec 10, 2009, at 9:56 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Shelley Powers wrote:
>>> With Ian's commitments to so many specifications, we need to consider
>>> starting off next year with a discussion about adding a couple of new
>>> editors, to help ease the burden placed on one man.
>> If anyone would like to edit anything, I'm more than happy to help getting
>> people up to speed. There are literally dozens of critical specs in the
>> Web standards space that desperately need more editors. So yes, please, if
>> you can bring in more editors, do so.
>> I work on the number of specs that is necessary to make good progress on
>> all of the specs that I work on. This is why, for instance, I stay on
>> schedule -- back in 2006 (before the W3C started work on HTML5), I
>> predicted that we would reach zero open issues in the WHATWG in October
>> 2009, and that is exactly what happened. Meanwhile, the W3C HTML WG was
>> formed with the charter stating that Last Call (zero issues) would be
>> reached in June 2008 -- at which point the HTMLWG's issue tracker was
>> still more than a year from reaching its peak of open issues. So the
>> numbers don't suggest that I'm overwhelmed with work, they suggest the
>> HTML WG is overwhelmed with work.
>> (I already said all this here:
>>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Dec/0195.html
>> ...but you didn't reply, and instead just repeated your statement again.
>> I would appreciate it if we as a working group could rely on people not
>> repeating arguments after they've already been responded to, without
>> acknowledging those responses and adjusting the arguments accordingly.)
>> --
>> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
>> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
>> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 18:17:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:04 UTC