Next Process Call Wednesday 15th July 7am PDT (please note the date)

We have conflicts on both the 8th and the 22nd, so we agreed to move both to a single call on the 15th.

We patted ourselves on our own backs at the last call; P2019 is probably done. We need formal AC/Director approval.

For P2020, the urgent task is to regroup and decide what we’re going to do.

As you know, we are issue-driven. I thought about creating a table of the issues, so we could see the summary, but I think Github searches make more sense. So my current best idea (seriously, I know, it’s Friday evening and even good ideas are hard to come by) is that we create a set of labels that could be ephemeral (we could delete them after the triage), with what we expect to do or have happen in the P2020 revision:

P2020: Priority (Issues that we ought to commit to doing this time; if we’re not finished on a priority, we might delay in order to finish it)
P2020: Candidate (If they get enough attention, we’d like to deal with this in this revision)
P2020: Defer (we know we don’t intend/want to address this year)
P2020: Close (once the triage is settled, we expect to close this unless someone objects and gives powerful pan-dimensional arguments to keep it open)

P2020: Discuss (we can’t seem to agree on one of the above and discussion is needed)

I’m open to suggestions on the label set. I would make them all the same, distinct and unpleasant colour. My proposal is that we all look at issues without a P2020 label and if we think one is obvious or even probably appropriate, just add it. If you disagree with a label, then take it off, and add "P2020:Discuss" and we’ll sort it out on the call(s).

Does that work?


> On Jun 22, 2020, at 17:35 , David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> The usual closers:
> 
> 5) Next meeting. Wed July 8th. We’ll be digging into P2021 for a rapid pass on resolving deferred matters, notably Registries.
> 

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Saturday, 27 June 2020 00:18:54 UTC