W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > June 2017

Draft Agenda Process Call June 14th, 9am Pacific

From: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 11:31:19 -0700
To: public-w3process <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-id: <B6739E03-535D-4C75-BF26-04998E00BE41@mac.com>
WebEx: https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=mdd55d9aecab3d933d03d7ac6584d0b0c
meeting code: 640 814 451

Full Webex Information is on our Mail Archives <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/internal-w3process/2017May/0000.html>  (member only accessible)

IRC is #w3process


1) Review any actions completed from the last call. Take up any discussions that are urgent.
   See GitHub assigned issues <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/assigned/*>

   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/2 — Leonie has agreed to take on analyzing the process and writing down the considerations.
 
   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/3  — Chaals will take the action of analyzing this one
   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/8  — Chaals to write a comment on the way it works and whether process changes are needed

   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/9  — Virginia to bring to PSIG’s attention, chair to ask Sandhawke to explore also
      Sandro responded in the comments on the issue, and discussion ensued.
   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/13 — Virginia to take up clarifying what we mean by a document needs process handling
   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/33 — Virgjnia  will come back with how to revive the conceptual link [to the 60 days]

   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/6  — Chair was supposed to email the AC but we had second thoughts; referred to the AB
      see thread starting <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2017May/0011.html>
   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/10 — Chair to raise this with the team/directors.
      raised, awaiting history etc. from the team

  https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/15 — Mike Champion to check the process and see whether we should make this active

  https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/23 — everyone was supposed to review Chaals’ proposal; see thread there.
     There seem to be two distinct questions. 
         (a) Do we have the ability to remove people from any group (WG, IG, whatever) ‘for cause’ (e.g. violation of code of conduct)?
         (b) Do we need the ability to remove ‘passengers’ from small elected bodies (e.g. TAG, AB)? 
              (We assume, I think, that even with the loss of ‘good standing’ rules, passengers in other Gs are not a problem.)

   Two self-assigned to Chaals as editorial:
      https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/29 — There are many places where "editorial changes" are called "minor changes”.
         Note that there is discussion from Glazou
      https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/44 — is it 28 days or four weeks?

2) Do we need to review the 4 closed issues?
   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed

3) Continue reviewing the issues in the GitHub Issue database <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues>, and 
 3.1) Tag the ones we intend to work on as ‘active’
 3.2) deal with any minor clean-up (e.g. Chaals recently closed an issue on mention of CEPC), tag duplicates
 3.3) for everything marked as ‘active’ , decide what the next steps are; ideally, have a champion (hello Mike) for it

 I believe we handled 1-15 inclusive but omitted #11 (why?), so we’ll start with 11 and then move to 16 and following.
   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/11
   https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/16

4) Next meeting. Currently July12th, 9am Pacific.

5) Any other business.

Thanks

Dave Singer

singer@mac.com
Received on Monday, 12 June 2017 18:31:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:44 UTC