Re: Closing MathML Refresh GitHub issues

How about if we add labels "resolution needed"  and "spec changes needed".
When an issue is added and needs to be discussed in a meeting, it gets the
" resolution needed" label added. Once the group reaches a conclusion, we
add  "spec changes needed" and "tests needed" labels as appropriate. Any
other steps that need to be done? When a step is done, the label is removed
and when the final label is removed, we close the issue. It would be great
is some of that could be automated, but even if it can't, I think that's
the workflow we need to follow.

    Neil


On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 5:53 AM Frédéric Wang <fwang@igalia.com> wrote:

> Hello David,
>
> Thanks for the suggestion. We already have a label "tests needed", I
> guess we can probably have extra labels to indicate the need to update
> specifications...
>
> On 02/05/2019 14:41, David Farmer wrote:
> >
> > Dear Frédéric (and all!),
> >
> > It would be good to have a milestone, or maybe a tag,
> > on those issues which have been decided but can't be closed for
> > some other reason.  That will help people see progress and also make
> > it easier to remember the status.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2 May 2019, Frédéric Wang wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I've re-opened some GitHub issues about decisions made in previous
> >> meetings.
> >>
> >> I think before closing an issue we should not only ensure that there is
> >> a consensus but also that the corresponding changes have been made in
> >> the MathML Core and MathML Full specification and that we have WPT tests
> >> covering these changes. Optionally, we should report bugs to
> >> Mozilla/WebKit bug trackers.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Frédéric Wang
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Frédéric Wang
>
>
>