W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > January 2020

Re: Closing stale evergreen issues

From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 08:53:16 -0500
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>, W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <dc784cf6-0de3-5845-f171-168ed8780527@w3.org>

On 1/9/2020 5:04 AM, Florian Rivoal wrote:
> Hi all,
> With the everblue branch now merged in, I think we can close (as accepted) https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/79

A question is whether we should have some "stub" issue open to remind us 
of the need for Continuous Development - until we actually have AC 
approval of Process 2020.  If so, #79 is as good as any to keep open.

Ordinarily, once a group addresses an issue in its Editor's Draft it 
immediately closes the issue. But that might be because there is almost 
certainty that the proposed ED will proceed on the REC track to REC 
level.  Rarely are there objections along the way. EME is a counterexample.

In this case, where we are making a major change in the process, we 
don't really know if the AC will accept it.  Hence potential value of 
having a stub issue opened until adoption.

> After that, since we went down the everblue/teal path rather than the evergreen one, I think we should close all other remaining evergreen issues:
> is:open label:Evergreen
> I think this is effectively implied by the decisions we've already taken, but I didn't want to close without an actual group resolution or confirmation by the chair.
> —Florian
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2020 13:53:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:54 UTC