W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > June 2008

Re: Bugzilla [was: discretion & the issue tracker]

From: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 19:00:54 +0200
Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, "Steven Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Chris Wilson" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "James Graham" <jg307@cam.ac.uk>, www-archive@w3.org, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, "Joshue O Connor" <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Message-Id: <433F09C6-7890-476E-9913-3BD235B271B5@robburns.com>
To: "Shawn Medero" <shawn@db79.com>

Hi Mike and Shawn,

On Jun 5, 2008, at 6:18 PM, Shawn Medero wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:57 AM, Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote:
>> Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, 2008-06-05 15:46 +0100:
>>> Why can't there be a 'proposal tracker' implemented that is open to
>>> anyone in the working group to add proposals to, via a form perhaps
>>> that asks for certain information about the proposal, so it can then
>>> be evaluated and debated by WG members?
>> It might not actually be difficult at all, and I think we already
>> have what may be an appropriate place/tool for it -- The W3C
>> public bugzilla:
>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/
> <snip>
>> One particular advantage of the bugzilla setup is that it would
>> allow people (even those that are not HTML WG members or members
>> of other W3C WGs) to opt-in to particular issues -- and get mail
>> only about those issues (and not need to try to follow or filter
>> public-html if they don't want to).
> Yes, exactly - this is a great idea Mike. It'll help immensely with
> people who are dealing with the HTML WG largely through sources like
> public-html-comments, blogs, etc.

There might be a use for this, but I think it further splinters the  
work of the WG. Most of the issues I raised would belong in the main  
issue-tracker anyway, so it wouldn't do anything to resolve our  
current dispute over these issues. What's needed for that is actual  
substantive discussion of those issues.

Take care,
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2008 17:09:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:33:30 UTC