OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [office] Meeting Effectiveness and Maintenance SC

My impression is that the TC Coordination Calls work best with the work
off-line to the calls and actions requiring voting well prepared prior to
the call (with the probe for comments prior to that call).

I also think that creation of a Maintenance Committee is timely, although I
can see polling the TC list on items where we would be baffled or uncertain
about the committee's desired direction.  I am available for such work along
with Michael, Rob, Patrick, and others.  In my case, it is part of my
gaining mastery over the specification so I can contribute more properly on
technical matter, so now is a good time before the spec hiccups become
invisible to me.

 - Dennis 

PS: I am concerned a little about the number of weekly calls I may be
dealing with.  I need to revamp my home-office telephony arrangements, I

-----Original Message-----
From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 22:02
To: 'OpenDocument Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [office] ODF TC call agenda and duration

If we can keep the main TC meetings to an hour, I think that is 
preferable.  The critical thing is for the meetings to focus on things 
that require a quorum of TC members to accomplish.  These are formally 
items which require votes by OASIS TC process or by the TC's standing 

If we are spending TC time on things that does not require all of, then we 
are probably not operating as efficiently as we could.

I notice that we have been spending a large amount of time recently on 
defect reports and errata.  Although this is important work, it is 
probably not something that should dominate our TC  call time.  We should 
be spending most of our time on ODF 1.2 proposals that are ready for 
approval, or nearly so. 

That is my opinion.  Does anyone disagree with that premise?

[ ... ]

It appears that Japan has submitted a 2nd defect report on ODF 1.0. 
Nothing surprising.  More typographical errors, much of it which we've 
already seen.  But we will need to process these, as well as other 
comments received by the public.  Rather than dominate TC time with these 
important, but less time sensitive issues, I wonder whether it is now 
appropriate to create a Maintenance SC?  Participants in this SC would be 
responsible for reviewing incoming comments and defect reports on existing 
ODF TC deliverables, and proposing dispositions (fix via errata, fix in 
next version, no fix, etc.) and drafting errata documents.  Both proposed 
dispositions and draft errata documents would be submitted to the full TC 
for review and approval.

[ ... ]

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 09/29/2008 
09:33:46 AM:

[ ... ]

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]