Re: Separate milestone for editorial issues ? from Mark Watson on 2016-05-13 (www-archive@w3.org from May 2016)

From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 08:06:22 -0700
To: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "Jerry Smith (WINDOWS)" <jdsmith@microsoft.com>, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>, Matt Wolenetz <wolenetz@google.com>, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAEnTvdCKo=XdicFohzLaEuUtcNVY2HN=_QxJj+2-KYJo-XG0Hg@mail.gmail.com>

I should have addressed this only to editors / chairs.

In addition, it might be useful to have a "Final Review" label. We would
replace "needs implementation" with this label when there is a Pull Request
available for the issue.

Thoughts ?

...Mark

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote:

> We have V1NonBlocking issues, some of which are substantial but only
> nice-to-have and some of which are purely editorial. I wonder if we should
> disambiguate them ?
>
> V1Editorial ? I assume we can address such purely editorial issues after
> June 9th.
>
> ...Mark
>

Received on Friday, 13 May 2016 15:06:55 UTC