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

Re: TTML2 - getting to CR

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 13:16:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+fkBE8-RWGHfMmJA0dATtuzgStH5Mb=oFNnDfDJv85cEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Cc: Timed Text Working Group <public-tt@w3.org>
I expect to post PRs or resolution for all open issues by 1 FEB. Further,
the group can agree to merge PRs earlier than 14 days as it may desire.

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>

> 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
> <https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+-label%3A%22pr+open%22+-label%3A%22pr+merged%22+-label%3Attml.next+-label%3Aeditorial+>
> 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 20:16:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:44:30 UTC