W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > August 2012

Re: First agenda proposal webrtc telco

From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:07:32 +0000
To: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6A37AE21-77C2-41C3-9F7D-21C2CB03DBF6@cisco.com>

On Aug 26, 2012, at 12:30 PM, Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:

> But I want to pick up the other part of your message: issues that block implementation. Such info is extremely  valuable and can really help moving the spec in the right direction.
> I think it would be very valuable if you could share with the WG the list of issues that block implementation.

Google folks told me the ICE state stuff not being in the spec ( and some other things ) were blocking their ability to check in code. 

> It is a correct observation that we're squeezing in many topics, and give short time to each of them. In part this comes from feedback given (by amongst others Mozilla) when the WG charter was out for AC review saying that they prefer no telcos, but to do all discussion on the list. So we've had a habit of quite few telcos, and at the telcos more touch on the topics but moving the in depth discussion to the list.

Obviously I prefer the list where that works, but for hard things, we need rapid interactive conversations to resolve the issues. 

> Perhaps we should change this; instead have more frequent telcos with fewer topic which we cover in depth. I would certainly be open for that if the WG (and my co-chair) thinks it is a good idea. And it would be natural to focus on covering the issues (in priority order) that block implementation in those meetings.

I think we could survive a few more meetings but not too many more. I think many of the people working on this feel like all they ever do is prep material for the next standards meeting and never have time to actually do the standards work. We don't need a lot more meetings - we need to have productive meetings. So far many of the meetings have the form of something is discussed for 20 minutes then no decisions is made. The next time we start right back where we were at the beginning of the previous 20 minute discussion. If we want to finnish this, the meetings need to pick topics we can come to a definitive conclusion on and drive them to conclusion.
Received on Monday, 27 August 2012 14:08:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:32 UTC