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

Re: Closing stale evergreen issues

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 08:35:44 +0100
Cc: W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
Message-id: <CDA033AB-A5EB-4353-850B-550C920BAB69@apple.com>
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>


> On Jan 22, 2020, at 15:48 , Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jan 21, 2020, at 17:32, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jan 21, 2020, at 8:33 , Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Jan 10, 2020, at 10:49, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 1/9/2020 8:47 PM, Florian Rivoal wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jan 9, 2020, at 22:53, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>> I don't mind keeping 79 open as a reminder of what we're working on.
>>>>> 
>>>>> However…
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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:
>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/labels/Evergreen
>>>>> 
>>>>> I still think we should close the rest.
>>>> +1
>>> 
>>> David,
>>> 
>>> As a chair, do you want to conclude that this is implied in the decision we've made to land everblue/teal and that I can close these, or do you want to run a separate CfC, or do you want to go over this over the phone next time?
>>> 
>>> As it is, detailed issues about the abandoned evergreen proposal seem to be noise to me, and I'd rather get them closed sooner than later, to give better visibility to actual open issues.
>>> 
>> 
>> Let’s look and make sure they are really Evergreen-specific.
> 
> I believe they all are. If you have doubts about any particular one, let's discuss individually.
> 
>> #303 would seem to apply if we get licensing commitments before Rec status or on non-Rec status, yes?
> 
> The ability to rescind things that aren't rec is already built in into the everblue/teal pull request that was merged recently. So we can either close this issue as resolved if we consider it to be about all ever*, or close it as out of scope if we consider it to be about evergreen specifically. Either way it should be closed.

OK

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Thursday, 23 January 2020 07:35:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 23 January 2020 07:35:55 UTC