- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:16:17 -0800
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTML Weekly WG <public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
On Jan 8, 2010, at 10:37 AM, Shelley Powers wrote: > > I marked the issue as postponed. If the bug does result in resolution > where everyone is happy, we can mark it closed. If not, we can raise > the issue again. > > Is this equitable? I think Ian is correct that raising the issue was out of order. I also agree with you that it would be wasteful to close the issue and raise a new one after the bug is resolved again. However, in the Tracker, issues can just as easily be moved from CLOSED to RAISED as vice versa. Therefore I suggest we mark the issue CLOSED for now, but reuse it and bring it back to RAISED if we need an issue for this bug after all. I would mildly prefer to do that than to have the tracker issue in an odd state. Does that sound ok? Besides the order of operations, I'd like to note one other procedural matter about this tracker issue: an issue should be raised only if someone sincerely objects to the bug resolution and asks for escalation. It's ok for someone who agrees to actually do the mechanics, but only if someone who objects asks for escalation. In this case, it doesn't look to me like anyone who disagrees with the disposition asked for escalation in the bug. I do appreciate that you raised this issue in the spirit of helpfulness, and I don't want you to shy away from helping people out in the future. But I mention this so that, if we get to the point in the process where raising an issue would be in order, we make sure to pay attention to this detail. Issues should not be raised speculatively, only if someone sincerely objects to a bug resolution and asks to escalate. Regards, Maciej
Received on Friday, 8 January 2010 20:16:51 UTC