Re: Call for Consensus (in email) on closing out process 2019, ONE WEEK POLL closing NOV 15th

On 08/11/2018 17:04, David Singer wrote:
[...]

  The four questions:
> 
> 1) The existing document at GitHub <https://w3c.github.io/w3process/> represents changes that we had consensus to incorporate. However, we have not established consensus that the resulting document should be sent ahead.  A diff with the current process (including, at the end, a summary of changes) can be seen by using the W3C Diff Service <https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2018%2FProcess-20180201%2F&doc2=https%3A%2F%2Fw3c.github.io%2Fw3process%2F>
> 
> Do we have consensus to send at least the current draft <https://w3c.github.io/w3process/> on to the AB, W3M, and then AC for approval?

+1

> 
> 
> 2) Pull Request: Sets the size of the AB to 9–11 https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/224
> 
> The current process enlarges the AB from 9 to 11, a size that might be difficult to fill all the time. This softens that change, saying “at least 9 and no more than 11”, and defines how the elections and so on run to manage that. While we’re in this area, it’s convenient to land this at the same time.
> 
> Do we have consensus to incorporate PR 224?
+1

> 
> 3) Pull Request: Clarify what the expectations are for advancing to CR https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/214
> 
> The phrase "Candidate Recommendations are expected to be acceptable as Recommendations” in the existing process has been found in practice to be confusing and even ambiguous. This pull request tries to clarify that.
> 
> Do we have consensus to incorporate PR 214?

+1

> 
> 4) Pull Request: Clarify maturity requirements for TR updates at the same maturity https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/215
> 
> This is based on, and depends on, 214, which is expected to be merged first.
> 
> This clarifies that if you update a document already in, say, CR, then the update should meet the CR entry criteria; EXCEPT in the case where you find multiple flaws in a CR, you can update to fix only some of them (even though normally you wouldn’t normally be allowed to enter CR with known flaws), as that’s an improvement.
> 
> Do we have consensus to incorporate PR 215?
+1

> 
> 

Léonie.

> 
> David Singer
> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
> 
> 

-- 
@LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe Carpe diem

Received on Friday, 9 November 2018 10:03:32 UTC