Re: Issue Triage

so 20. 5. 2023 v 18:04 odesílatel Dmitri Zagidulin <dzagidulin@gmail.com>
napsal:

> Melvin,
>
> I hear your concerns about needing a more async-friendly process for going
> through existing AP/AS2/etc spec issues. That'll be one of the first things
> the CG can decide on.
>
> That said, with temporary chair hat off, please stop :) Evan went out of
> his way to accommodate your requests in these issue triage calls. There are
> two-way links to and from the issue and the wiki. The wiki edit version is
> easily discoverable from looking at timestamps and the edit history. Also,
> "normative change nearly slipped through unnoticed" is a very dramatic
> exaggeration of what actually happened during that session.
>

Dmitri, there is legitimate concern about normative changes to the spec.

These, partly stem from the precedent set by the addition of the
"alsoKnownAs" term, which I believe was rushed through our process and
implemented as a protected term within the context, with barely noticeable
versioning.  This was something that got voted through by a small number of
people (you were one), and there is a concern more changes can happen.

The complexity of this situation is further compounded by systems like
Mastodon, which treats two accounts of the same individual as distinct
entities. This is problematic because we already have the widely used
"owl:sameAs" and "schema:sameAs". Introducing a new term not only creates
unnecessary duplication but also disrupts the potential use of an Inverse
Functional Property (IFP) for creating nomadic identities and enabling
smooth account migrations—features that many are eagerly anticipating.

We now face the challenging task of untangling this complexity in the next
minor or major version update. Furthermore, this situation has disrupted
the interoperation with heterogeneous systems

However this is probably the wrong thread to go into that very long and
very complex topic.  IMHO, it's worth adding a bit of process and being
mindful about normative changes, in general.  I think we've added some
small but useful checks, here.

>
> Evan, we deeply appreciate you taking the initiative to do some issue
> processing livestreams with real-time community involvement. It's been very
> helpful in adding momentum to this latest iteration of the CG. Now that the
> group is restarted, I have no doubt we can figure on a good process for
> going through further issues.
>
> On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 4:24 AM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> st 17. 5. 2023 v 18:43 odesílatel Evan Prodromou <evan@prodromou.name>
>> napsal:
>>
>>> I ran through three issues in the ActivityPub repository. I decided to
>>> address the most recent first this session, in order to nibble the cookie
>>> from the other side, toward the middle.
>>>
>>>
>>>    - https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/371 documented in
>>>    Primer/Outbox <https://www.w3.org/wiki/ActivityPub/Primer/Outbox>,
>>>    closed as resolved
>>>    - https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/369 documented in a new
>>>    FAQ <https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/FAQ>, closed as
>>>    resolved
>>>    - https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/370 assigned to myself,
>>>    looking for ways to align and harmonize with the FEP project on
>>>    archives <https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fediverse-ideas/issues/5>.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks to everyone who came to help out. All mistakes my own.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Evan.  I noticed that your current approach to closing issues doesn't
>> involve linking them to a versioned wiki or vice versa. This was something
>> you had previously agreed to do to ensure that the context and resolution
>> of each issue remain clear to everyone involved.
>>
>> I'm concerned about this omission, particularly given that a normative
>> change nearly slipped through unnoticed on one occasion. Given that the
>> specification we're working on is used in an ecosystem beyond our community
>> group, accuracy is crucial.
>>
>> I respectfully request that you document your process and obtain the
>> group's agreement before proceeding with further issue closures. A two-step
>> process where an issue is marked to be closed and a second assignee
>> confirms it would offer better oversight.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Evan
>>>
>>> On May 17, 2023, at 10:46 AM, Evan Prodromou <evan@prodromou.name>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Just a reminder that I’m doing issue triage at 11:30AM ET. I’ll be
>>> working on ActivityPub. I’ll be live-streaming here:
>>>
>>> Jitsi Meet
>>> <https://meet.jit.si/moderated/c1c3c53fd2a3a78819e0cbb534848202b26b6af380c0af284edab895e35cb3c1>
>>> meet.jit.si
>>> <https://meet.jit.si/moderated/c1c3c53fd2a3a78819e0cbb534848202b26b6af380c0af284edab895e35cb3c1>
>>> <jitsilogo.png>
>>> <https://meet.jit.si/moderated/c1c3c53fd2a3a78819e0cbb534848202b26b6af380c0af284edab895e35cb3c1>
>>> <https://meet.jit.si/moderated/c1c3c53fd2a3a78819e0cbb534848202b26b6af380c0af284edab895e35cb3c1>
>>>
>>> All SWICG members welcome!
>>>
>>> Evan
>>>
>>>
>>>