[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office] (OASIS Issue Tracker) Commented: (OFFICE-1700) Editor Note: Section 18.258 style:font-charset
Patrick, I believe it is actually more complicated than this. Let me see if I can recount the bidding: 1. Michael made a JIRA workflow proposal, with the statement you quote, on May 29, here: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200905/msg00451.html> 2. There was discussion and some proposed amendments to the proposal in comments from Rob Weir: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200905/msg00452.html> with follow-on from Michael: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200905/msg00453.html> and you: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200905/msg00454.html> and later, Andreas suggesting that going right to resolved might not be a great idea, <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200905/msg00458.html> and Michael affirming the idea that the approval comes with approval of a draft as committee draft, <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200906/msg00009.html> 3. You also responded to Michael's original note, asking about "applied" <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200905/msg00455.html> with follow-on from Rob Weir: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200905/msg00456.html> and Mary: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200905/msg00457.html> with Michael concurring on the use of applied by you as soon as you've done that, <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200906/msg00008.html> 4. The modification is that you can say applied so long as it is done in the next draft to be uploaded. The other modification is that a resolution can be marked as being held for discussion, and this discussion is to happen by request for agenda time and/or on the list (the case of discussion through comments right on JIRA was not mentioned). There is also some suggestion that there can be issues raised on a next committee draft or during its approval (not clear to me about that), and somehow that would have a different fate. I think this may have to do with deciding something is substantive instead of editorial? 5. Finally, I am looking at the minutes of the 2009-06-08 meeting, and I do not see that this proposal in whatever its agreed final form Michael has it in was discussed for approval of the TC as a whole. It was not on the agenda. Is that accurate enough with regard to where we are with this? - Dennis PS: I find this page illuminating in terms of what the status elements are for the standard workflow, <http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/ShowConstantsHelp.jspa#StatusTypes>. It is also interesting that an issue has a re-opened state that can happen. Of course, the JIRA definition is for a regime where the reporter of an issue is asked to concur to its resolution, and we don't quite do things that way. -----Original Message----- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 17:37 To: 'Patrick Durusau' Cc: 'office@lists.oasis-open.org' Subject: RE: [office] (OASIS Issue Tracker) Commented: (OFFICE-1700) Editor Note: Section 18.258 style:font-charset Got it! Michael says use resolved to mean there is a proposed resolution satisfactory to the proposer. But notice that the only available next state is applied and that means the "resolved" proposal is implemented. So when does the TC get to have a say? Apparently we have to catch it in the next vote on making the draft into a cd, which is an up-down thing on the whole draft. I will stop before I say something really rude about this. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:patrick@durusau.net] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 16:49 To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org Cc: office@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [office] (OASIS Issue Tracker) Commented: (OFFICE-1700) Editor Note: Section 18.258 style:font-charset Dennis, You know, I don't just make this stuff up to irritate you. ;-) From Micheal's post of 29 May 2009: > My proposal how we proceed is: > > Whoever has time and and interest may comment on an item, and may > provide a resolution. This resolution is recorded in the "proposal" > field. If a proposal for a resolution does exist, the proposer of the > resolution sets the status of the issue to "resolved". > > Patrick (or myself if an issue affects the schema) takes the issues > whose status is "resolved" and applies the proposed resolution to the > specification text. He then sets the status to "Applied". > > The changes to the specification still will be recorded. We continue to > have a week for TC internal reviews of drafts before we vote on them in > a TC meeting, or we conduct electronic ballots for committee drafts, > that run at least a week anyway, so that there is the same time > available for a review. > > TC members therefore have the choice to either watch the items in JIRA, > or to just review the changes in the next draft. The approval of a > resolution takes place with the approval of a committee draft. This > means that nothing that we do in JIRA implies any kind of approval by > the TC, and that it is not required to watch the changes in JIRA to > figure out what changes are made in a draft. > > When a draft has been approved as committee draft, all issues applied to > that draft are closed (unless someone has objected to a particular > resolution). See: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/office/email/archives/200905/msg00451.html Closing down for the day. Have to go let my chickens out in the yard for a bit. ;-) Hope you are having a great day! Patrick Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > Patrick, my understanding of "resolved" in JIRA is that it means resolution has been *agreed*, "applied" in JIRA means, in my understanding, that the resolution has been implemented. > > A brand new JIRA issue could contain a proposed resolution. > > I think we need to reaffirm exactly at what point something becomes resolved. > > (There may be a special case around editorial matters where you get to declare something resolved. In that case, I suppose, someone would need to open a new issue in order to object to your determination.) > > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: OASIS Issues Tracker [mailto:workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org] > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 14:22 > To: office@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [office] [OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (OFFICE-1700) Editor Note: Section 18.258 style:font-charset > > > [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-1700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=11901#action_11901 ] > > Patrick Durusau commented on OFFICE-1700: > ----------------------------------------- > > Sigh, all "resolution" means as used here is that a proposal has been made. Even if I "apply" the proposal, the issue has not yet be "closed." > > We have to somehow move the issues through JIRA. I look for "resolved" issue to consider the proposals and make further comments if it seems unclear to me or to need further discussion. > > Granted the process semantics aren't what I would choose starting from a blank slate, but that wasn't an option. > > [ ... ] > > > -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34 Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]