- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 13:11:44 -0700
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > On 09/13/2010 03:45 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Sam Ruby<rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: >>> >>> On 09/13/2010 03:07 AM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 08:24:39 +0200, Jonas Sicking<jonas@sicking.cc> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Henri Sivonen<hsivonen@iki.fi> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Would it be possible for the accessibility task force to track bugs >>>>>>> using the status whiteboard instead of using a keyword. >>>>>> >>>>>> Or, better yet, continue to use keywords but make the email path not >>>>>> spam public-html for keyword changes. Or for any bug modifications >>>>>> after the bug creation for that matter. >>>>> >>>>> I always liked the fact that the group got email when the NE keyword >>>>> was added. >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> I want every member of this list to be aware of -- at a minimum -- the >>> subject of every non-editorial bug. Ultimately, I expect the change >>> control >>> as we move to LC and beyond to be that at some point the only changes >>> made >>> to the document are in response to bugs reported. >> >> Note that the NE keyword hasn't been 100% successful in this task. I >> believe a lot of the filed bugs are currently lacking it. > > While anything involving humans is bound to have bugs, Mike has been > dilligent so that I don't think that there is any systematic problems here. > >> Though I >> can't really blame people because sometimes it's hard to tell if an >> issue just needs to be clarified, or if behavior needs to be changed. >> I think it would be much more effective to have the initial bugmail to >> to the list whenever a bug is filed. > > I've seen a lot of asdflkasd;jads bugs as a result of the bug form. If > people are complaining now... Do you have alternative proposals? One solution might be to have the bug form give bugs a separate QA contact, and then manually migrate the ones that aren't spam. / Jonas
Received on Monday, 13 September 2010 20:12:37 UTC