Re: Draft Agenda Process Call June 14th, 9am Pacific

On 6/12/2017 2:31 PM, David Singer wrote:
> 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.

I would recommend the following for AOB.

I think it would be worthwhile for us to agree as a team on (a) what are 
the issues that we feel are most critical for Process 2018 and (b) 
what's the timeframe that we anticipate - getting task force consensus; 
discussion with AB and AC; draft Process 2018 document, etc.

With that, we would make sure that we address the critical few ASAP, and 
roll up as many of the less important fixes as possible in that time frame.

For me, the top two items to address in Process 2018 are (1) Maintenance 
and (2) Voting and Composition for the TAG.  The former is getting a lot 
of attention at the AB [1] at the moment.  The AB is working its way 
through various process and IPR issues and in my view probably this 
should stay with the AB for a while before being brought to the Process 
CG.  The latter is getting some attention at the AB [2], but I feel at 
this point it is more appropriate for the Process CG to take up this issue.

[1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/AB/2017_Priorities#Maintenance
[2] https://www.w3.org/wiki/AB/2017_Priorities#Role_of_Director

>
> Thanks
>
> Dave Singer
>
> singer@mac.com
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2017 17:09:23 UTC