Re: (my view of) the state of our issue assignment process..

oh, i just noticed/recalled that in terms of PRs<https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pulls>, we have been setting the assignee to be the same as the PR submitter essentially by default.  just fyi/fwiw...

=JeffH

###
On 6/5/17, 2:47 PM, "Angelo Liao" <huliao@microsoft.com<mailto:huliao@microsoft.com>> wrote:

My impression of this WG's issue assigning process was that it is similar to how the milestones are assigned and issues assigning are just a bookkeeping way to keep us organized (just like milestones). Since there's a difference to the interpretation and I personally like the more stale issues to be resolved (missing the days when the issues are double-digits ☺), I self-assigned the issues that I assigned to others and I will be responsible for either getting the issues resolved or helping them find the right owners.

-----Original Message-----
From: =JeffH [mailto:Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com]
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 2:10 PM
To: W3C Web Authn WG <public-webauthn@w3.org<mailto:public-webauthn@w3.org>>
Subject: (my view of) the state of our issue assignment process..

..such as it is..

@angeloKai wrote in https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/469


> Assigning this to @jyasskin at the moment as whoever brings the  > topic is generally considered the assignee. We can discuss  > changing this at next WG meeting.

well, that actually is not how we've been operating, it seems to me at least. We for-better-or-worse have an unwritten issue-handling process, and it is not assigned-to-whom-submits. In fact ~1/2 of our issues are unassigned. I've been assigning issues to myself which I'm committing to resolve (whether or not I submitted it). Others have done the same. On calls, if someone agrees to work on an issue, then someone different than that person occasionally performs the assignment because it is convenient at the time.

This is in contrast to assessing issues and anointing them with labels and milestones -- various of us have just been doing that and changing them if we think its incorrect or whatever, and if it is contentious then we've been discussing them on the calls (but this is rare it seems).

Anyway, the above is only my perspective on how we've been operating, perhaps there's others. Coming to explicit agreement on how issue assignment is performed would likely be a good idea.

Also, our walking through PRs and issues on calls seems to be being helpful.

HTH,

=JeffH