RE: Thoughts on how to coordinate CVS work etc.

Prasad, Good rules, thanks.
Editors,
Could we have an editors call relatively soon? I'd like to get an
understanding of how we're going to work together, and start
distributing the workload. I'm not sure how many are traveling today
after the adjournment (I know at least Maryann is), or tomorrow (I'm
traveling in the afternoon). Can we get on the phone tomorrow morning?
Any suggestions? Thanks!  --  Toufic
 
Toufic Boubez, Ph.D.
Chief Technology Officer
 
LAYER 7 TECHNOLOGIES / Advancing the application network.
604.681.9377 x310 (w)   604.288.7970 (m)
tboubez@layer7tech.com <mailto:tboubez@layer7tech.com>  (e)
www.layer7tech.com <http://www.layer7tech.com/>  (w)


	-----Original Message-----
	From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Prasad
Yendluri
	Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 6:16 PM
	To: public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org
	Subject: Thoughts on how to coordinate CVS work etc.
	
	

	Folks,

	 

	Here is what we had been doing to coordinate editing work with
some other efforts I had been involved with, that also use CVS:

	 

	1.	When issues get resolved editors accept ownership of a
subset of the issues based on their availability and ownership of the
pertinent area of the spec etc. People play good sport and take turns to
distribute the load evenly amongst all the folks available. 
	2.	Generally we have assigned ownership to a doc but not to
a subsection of the doc, to make sure a section does not suffer due to
unavailability of an editor. Also if an unreasonable number of issues
are scoped to a section, then the owner is unfairly burdened etc.    
	3.	Taking ownership of the issues is typically done the
editors call (typically every 2 weeks 1 hour, immediately following the
WG call), after looking at the list of all closed issues and AIs pending
incorporation into the specs. We also decide who goes first, who goes
next etc. We also plan for a final date for completing all the assigned
tasks and how long each one needs. We also send a note to the list with
the details of the above, so that everyone knows and *remembers* what
they agreed to etc. 
	4.	Then when an editors starts work, the editor sends a
note to the editors list that he / she is claiming the "pen" for doc.
And when the pen is released, the editors list is notified again, so
that the next one in the list can pick up the pen. 
	5.	This could seem complex process but, in my experience it
has proven to be very smooth and worked really well. It prevented people
from stepping on each other's work or needlessly waiting for others to
complete their work, when no one was really doing something etc. 
	6.	In terms of tracking the changes in the doc, we made
sure an entry is added in the revision history table each time some one
checks-in a new version.  Each entry contains the identity of the person
that made the change, revision number (same as CVS revision number), a
brief description of the changes made identifying the issue number, AI
number etc. as applicable.   The revision history table is placed at the
end of the document. WSDL 2.0 has a god example of it. 
	7.	Since we are editing an xml document, I have found it
useful to do a spell check and also to generate the HTML version and
review, prior to check-in. 
	8.	BTW, how do we plan to track the issues list from the
editors' perspective? That is, which issues have been incorporated and
which issues are closed and pending application to the spec etc.? 

	 

	Just some inputs for discussion.

	 

	Regards,

	Prasad