bug fix process question

Editors, I was under the impression that things entered the "editorial" 
work queue when the working group triaged the bugs and agreed to mark them 
editorial (implictly meaning that we have some level of consensus on the 
resolution, and allowing anyone on the edge to assert the need for a 
post-editorial wg needsReview stage).  I seem to remember a discussion a 
month or so ago re-affirming this.  Am I remembering incorrectly?
Someone pointed out to me that some bugs opened last week, but as yet not 
triaged, are getting editorial attention, and this confused them.
There is a tradeoff between process confidence (transparency, enforcement 
i.e. the agreed-to process is being followed) and throughput, I'll readily 
acknowledge.  If the working group as a whole is now comfortable allowing 
editors to use their judgement to fix bugs in advance of triage by the 
working group, I believe that is a decision within our purview... I'm just 
not sure we've had that discussion.  Alternatively, and I think pretty 
safely, in cases where the editors believe a bug is purely editorial they 
could append the suggested revision (logically, make a proposal) in 
advance of triage.  There might well be other viable alternatives.

Best Regards, John

Street address: 2455 South Road, P328 Poughkeepsie, NY USA 12601
Voice: 1+845-435-9470      Fax: 1+845-432-9787

Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2008 14:55:54 UTC