W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > January 2018

Re: TTML2 - getting to CR

From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:48:02 -0800
Message-ID: <CAF_7JxAvkGj7j6LEzBgo7=1ReaexsOoPUUNkaSwoAnzS5C594g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Cc: Timed Text Working Group <public-tt@w3.org>
Hi Nigel,

> 13 are i18n comments.

Can you confirm that these will need to be closed (and not merely
deferred to a future CR) as a matter of process before CR?

Best,

-- Pierre

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 10:27 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> wrote:
> All,
>
> We agreed to move to CR of TTML2 by the end of January. I think we have
> general acceptance that a 2 week slip at this stage would be acceptable,
> i.e. the proposal to transition would be discussed in the TTWG call on 15th
> February. However, in order to complete work on the open issues, they all
> would need a pull request to be opened by 1st February at the latest so that
> they can be closed within our normal 2 week period, assuming there are no
> outstanding objections to closing them.
>
> Looking at the ttml2 issues list, and filtering out all those with open or
> merged pull requests, and all editorial issues, there are 44 open issues.
> Of those, 6 are discussed and agreed. 13 are i18n comments. So 25 issues
> have been opened by group members and have no agreed resolution at this
> stage, and 31 have no open pull request yet.
>
> We are very soon going to have to decide to defer some issues to a future
> version or slip even further back. Group members have expressed strong views
> against further slippage in the past and I have no reason to believe the
> situation has changed. I am treating 15th February as the hard deadline, at
> which point all required pull requests must have been merged.
>
> This means that the Editors need to know as soon as possible if there are
> any issues that need particular prioritisation for creating pull requests.
>
> It also means that if any member is intending to raise a formal objection to
> transitioning to CR based on any particular issues not being resolved, then
> it would be fair to
>
> a) inform the group of those issues as soon as possible and
> b) lend a hand preparing pull requests that would resolve them.
>
> I have added a "blocks CR" label to the TTML2 repository. Please could any
> members who would object to transitioning to CR based on issues not being
> resolved add this label to the relevant issues. If possible also prepare a
> pull request in the next week against the issue.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Nigel
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 25 January 2018 18:49:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 25 January 2018 18:49:08 UTC