Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference -- 30 Jun 2015

<trackbot> Date: 30 June 2015

<scribe> scribe: timeless

Managing feedback

[ Scribe is working on thinking about how to take notes ]

[ we'll get back to this later ]

Discuss new Telcon Time

SteveZ: i think we need phone calls for planning purposes if nothing else, they don't have to last an hour
... w/ the exception of David Singer, it looks like Wednesday at 8am (pacific) would be better
... i think there's a need for the telephone conference
... i've seen email discussions go on forever (and i'm guessing the same thing happens in github)
... i think we do more or less Asynchronous decision making, since we have a proposal "can you live with this"
... i'd be happy to hear other people's comments

chaals: when ArtB said everything should be github'ized
... i was heavily opposed to it, i was happy for everyone else to use it, but not me
... insisting on a tool your editor is not familiar w/ is just plain dumb
... I think timeless and kaarl identified the problems
... it's good for software
... but tracking comments is dicey
... the tools at this stage aren't a big deal
... teleconfs/stuff not happening is our fault
... crap organization
... SteveZ is right, we often fail to get proposals, if we don't have proposals, we don't have anything to talk about
... if we do have a proposal, that's what makes email discussions more manageable
... people can live with it, can't live with it, can live w/ it with changes, don't care, ...
... if people don't care/can't live, then you can work on a new proposal
... i don't see a need for frequent teleconfs
... twice yearly at AC meeting, if we had a lot of people interested, then perhaps there'd be more value in F2F meetings
... and the process should be changed conservatively, it's an agreement amongst 400 different actors

<SteveZ> I agree the F2F meetings for the Process are not particularly useful

chaals: in order for them to engage over many years and individuals, it's important that they understand it and can read it
... the idea of revising it was to make it easier
... people were saying "the process document says X"
... and Jeff said "oh, really, can you find a pointer?"
... and they look (for something they were quoting for years), and can't,
... --
... I think an async process would enable people to consider a proposal
... possibly encourage people to wait a few days
... introducing a bit of a balance between people who are happy to bang back and forth on psuedo-legal points of language
... and the people who need to take it to their translators and lawyers and get an opinion

SteveZ: you're agreeing w/ Mike_Champion's point that we can do better; that we don't need as many phone calls;
... that we can work asynchronously; that we need people to develop proposals to make that happen (we can do that on email); we don't need github to do that

chaals: Yes; yes; yes; yes ... yes

Mike_Champion: ... four people talking past eachother is the problem we're trying to solve here

SteveZ: if tag our email w/ the issue we're talking about, that helps identify the email stuff
... i'd like to continue using email
... personal preference
... I think we can move the phone calls to 8am (Pacific) on Wednesday

Mike_Champion: how many people responded to the survey?

SteveZ: the usual six people
... there were two times where people had hard stops
... the reasons for mon/wed @8am were the fewest "if need bes"
... does anyone have a mon/wed pref?

Mike_Champion: both are equally inconvenient

chaals: my preference is to not have phone calls unless we need a phone call

Mike_Champion: monthly might be reasonable

SteveZ: we can do it w/ a monthly phone call to make sure we're moving along
... i can ping people
... if we have the slot available, if we need to, we can use it
... is there a day of the month?

chaals: 3rd monday i have a clash
... how about 2nd monday?

SteveZ: does that work for everyone?

timeless: (thinking)

chaals: sure

Mike_Champion: sure

timeless: yes

<SteveZ> RESOLUTION: Monthly phone calls at 8AM Pacific on Second Monday of the Month

SteveZ: i'm going to work through the issues list for 2016
... i'll use the CfC mechanism for broadening the base when we have something worth sending to the broader base

chaals: sounds grand to me

RESOLUTION: Monthly phone calls at 8AM Pacific on Second Monday of the Month

chaals: if twice a week there's an email from you driving consensus/summary of where we're at
... it becomes clear whether other people are replying/participating or not
... if no one replies, you can go back to the AB and identify that no one from them is involved

SteveZ: if you want to get rid of the phone call, you can say "oh, i can do X and draft something for it"

chaals: i'd assert that the phone call hasn't been a hugely effective mechanism either

SteveZ: i agree

chaals: if it doesn't work, go back to the AB saying we'll fill up your meetings w/ process until you decide to do the work
... i think that's a reasonably clear and reasonable process
... that enables Wayne and others to participate as equals
... and Dave Singer

SteveZ: at 8, he's at least on a bus (instead of catching it)
... i don't have any more business for the call

Discuss use of GitHub

timeless: do i need to minute my comments about github?

chaals: i can +1 your comments

Mike_Champion: if w3c goes down the tube, everyone's using github...

chaals: the cool kids do not work on organizational process
... the lack of participation is not because we're the wrong tool
... it's because it's uninteresting
... the people for whom it's interesting find html radical and new

Mike_Champion: doesn't the existing system have issues?

chaals: it does, but i don't think github solves them
... if you want to submit a patch, instead of a PR, you send an edited portion of the document

SteveZ: i was reading "how to think about github"
... "back in history, you used to do, do the stuff, put it together, send a change patch"
... if you haven't got a lot of them and aren't doing it frequently, that's not a bad process

chaals: if you trust the editor to use a consistent wording style
... then you can propose a thought, and the editor can propose a change

timeless: conversely if the editor can't use a consistent wording style, then you end up w/ a long sequence of changes

chaals: Mike_Champion, if you want to be the editor, i'm not attached to being the editor
... if you want to be editor, anyone is welcome to do that

Mike_Champion: i'm sympathetic w/ that
... and i'm not prepared to take that on
... resolution is to try to work in email in a more disciplined and productive way, that's fine
... i think it falls on the chair (SteveZ) to tell people to change the subject line
... bikeshedding/tangents w/o is problematic
... the worst offenders are chaals and I

<SteveZ> RESOLUTION: We will continue to use e-mail for disccusion with an emphasis on (a) having discussions proceed with a suggested change, (b) using issue numbers in the subject line and (c) having the chair ask people to follow the e-mail protocol

chaals: works for me

Mike_Champion: thanks, that's great

timeless: sure

RESOLUTION: We will continue to use e-mail for disccusion with an emphasis on (a) having discussions proceed with a suggested change, (b) using issue numbers in the subject line and (c) having the chair ask people to follow the e-mail protocol

Mike_Champion: where are we on Process 2015?

SteveZ: there's a meeting on July 13
... TimBL will talk individually w/ the four formal objectors

chaals: we're waiting for TimBL to make a decision
... it appears he won't make a decision in the next two weeks

Mike_Champion: the value of this decision model is that at the end of the day, TimBL makes a decision

AOB

[ None ]

SteveZ: thanks timeless

chaals: thanks timeless

[ Adjourned ]

trackbot, end meeting

- DRAFT -

Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference

30 Jun 2015

Attendees

Contents

Managing feedback

Discuss new Telcon Time

Discuss use of GitHub

AOB

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output