Re: Goals and Procedures

Matthias wrote:

> What I realized (since time is short) is that we should constrain
> ourselves on a minimal spec that is good enough.
> 
> What this means:
> - We should focus on helping EU compliance
> - We should improve implementability
> - We should try to abstain from fundamental redesigns and
>  substantial new features.

I agree in principle and like where you’re heading very much! Yet I expect there will be a few things we will want to revisit either to (a) draft the text a little more clearly, or (b) avoid “but we could do better if only!” as we go along.

If I might offer a friendly extension to your framework, I suggest we capture all new issues we want to get to but keep them frozen until we’re done with the current minimal required set. After completion of that minimal set, let’s time box it: we’ll get through as many issues as time allows, with some notion of most important & easiest first.

My intent is very much *not* to open up revisiting everything forever. However, I imagine things will crop up where we might regret being quite as strict as the process you outlined. Having some notion of creating an issue to get back to later if we possibly can might be a good middle ground, and incentivizes getting the core done quickly. :-) 

All that said: this is meant as refinement at the edges and not as objection. I can live with what you outlined as-is.

[I’ll try to get to a few points on issues discussions later in the week if I can catch a breath — sorry to drop mid-conversation, Shane. Also, Roy, I sorta-scribbed last call in IRC if you want unofficial minutes.]

 Aleecia

Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2017 00:11:33 UTC