Re: Last Call Issues format

At 12:33 AM 12/14/2004 -0500, Karl Dubost wrote:

>Le 13 déc. 2004, à 20:03, Lofton Henderson a écrit :
>>>         * Issues List Created [2]
>>
>>Have we have decided to do Last Call issues processing in Bugzilla?
>
>Is it a problem?
>and if yes, why?

This is about the 3rd (actually, 4th) different format in the last 12 
months.  It would seem good to pick a system and stick with it.  Because... 
I for example don't know Bugzilla very well.  When I'm short of time, it 
would be nice to be able to go to the issues list and read it, without 
having to get oriented to Bugzilla.

The same is true for a non-QAWG visitor to
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/#issues .
I think some uniformity of the various issues documents is more 
user-friendly.  (Btw, that location is missing the QAH and SpecGL issue 
summaries that were generated at and around the time of the Santa Clara 
meeting, which accounted for the 4th format.)

Then there are some open questions...

Who has write access to the issues?  Everyone, like in many Bugzilla 
applications?  Or just QA staff?  Or different access to different parts of 
the bug reports?

We had tools to process the old XML-based format for the sort of summary 
documents needed to make transitions like LC-to-CR.  You (QA staff) will 
have to make new tools or manual methods to do those same tasks.

If all of W3C is moving to a uniform issues system, and that is Bugzilla, 
then this change would make sense.

My 2¢.

-Lofton.


>>>[2]
>>>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi? product=QA&component=QASpec- GL
>>>[3] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=954
>>>[4] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=955