13:56:32 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #w3process
13:56:32 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/10/06-w3process-irc
13:56:34 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:56:36 <Zakim> Meeting: Revising W3C Process Community Group
13:56:49 <dsinger> present+ dsinger
13:58:56 <cwilso> present+
14:01:13 <plh> plh has joined #w3process
14:05:32 <jrosewell> jrosewell has joined #w3process
14:05:38 <jrosewell> present+
14:05:48 <plh> present+
14:06:38 <weiler> present+
14:06:38 <plh> scribe+
14:06:51 <plh> Chair David
14:06:56 <plh> Chair: David
14:07:50 <jeff> jeff has joined #w3process
14:08:14 <dsinger> plh: Update on the FO. W3M decided to approve the process last week. Understood from the objectors that the objections will be dealt with in teh next version. But we won't hold.
14:08:30 <dsinger> plh; we will add the two clarifications on the documents that are subject to AC review
14:08:57 <dsinger> plh: Formal release will be after TPAC on Nov 2nd
14:09:11 <dsinger> Florian: what document would you like me to make?
14:09:35 <dsinger> plh: Please make a final document, with the Nov date and the status of the current official process
14:09:40 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #w3process
14:09:44 <dsinger> q?
14:09:49 <jrosewell> Thank you.
14:10:02 <fantasai> present+
14:10:06 <plh> scribe+
14:10:38 <plh> Topic: Pull Requests
14:10:52 <dsinger> looking at 557 https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/557
14:11:28 <plh> #557 allows the CEO/team to handle Member submissions
14:11:54 <plh> florian: separate questions on what to do to appeal, we'll deal with that later
14:11:59 <TallTed> present+
14:12:02 <dsinger> q?
14:12:18 <plh> Resolved: Merge #557
14:12:30 <plh> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/558
14:12:31 <dsinger> Next #558 Disciplnary auth https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/558
14:12:50 <plh> florian: moving disciplinary authority from the Director to the CEO
14:12:55 <dsinger> q?
14:13:04 <plh> Resolved: Merge #558
14:13:26 <plh> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/559
14:13:30 <dsinger> Next #559 a grab-bag https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/559
14:14:12 <plh> Florian: moving participation from the Director to the CEO
14:14:27 <cwilso> q+
14:14:55 <plh> David: Member, Group chairs, Participants
14:15:06 <plh> ... we never used that participants in the past
14:15:15 <plh> David: Invited Experts
14:15:46 <plh> ... including disagreement between Chairs and Team Contacts
14:16:01 <plh> ack cw
14:16:03 <dsinger> ack cw
14:16:19 <plh> Chris: bit concerned about appointing and reappointing Chairs
14:16:24 <plh> ... it's a hot topic lately
14:16:38 <plh> ... Chair appointment have been contentious
14:16:53 <plh> ... moving that to the team may create frustrations
14:17:03 <plh> Florian: initial decision and recourse
14:17:11 <dsinger> q?
14:17:13 <plh> ... team is the right one to make the initial decision
14:17:15 <dsinger> q+
14:17:17 <fantasai> s/initial/two parts to this: initial/
14:17:52 <plh> ... but if you disagree, we have an open issue about this. lack of clarity if you can formally object or not
14:17:56 <plh> q+
14:18:22 <plh> ... you can reach out to the team before making a formal objection
14:18:27 <dsinger> Indeed we have https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/281 objecting to chair appointments #281
14:18:46 <plh> chris: concerns that it doesn't put pressure on the team to negotiate that ahead of time
14:18:49 <dsinger> q?
14:18:49 <jeff> q+
14:19:00 <florian> q+
14:19:02 <plh> ... I don't have a clear answer, just concerned
14:19:22 <plh> david: we have an open issue indeed
14:19:41 <cwilso> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/281
14:19:47 <fantasai> scribe+
14:19:48 <plh> ... it's also about documenting current practices
14:20:07 <fantasai> dsinger: ...
14:20:19 <fantasai> plh: Believe we should have a process that's easy in the straightforward cases
14:20:24 <fantasai> plh: and have recourse if things go wrong
14:20:31 <fantasai> plh: I like Florian's proposal
14:20:48 <fantasai> plh: Right now if chair wants to step down, we refuse until they give us an alternative person, e.g
14:20:59 <fantasai> plh: We do rely more and more on the participants of the WG to decide the group
14:21:03 <fantasai> plh: so it's done very cooperatively
14:21:24 <fantasai> plh: I'm surprised to hear we don't have a way to formally object
14:21:34 <fantasai> plh: for initial groups, we don't always have names at the start
14:21:42 <fantasai> plh: but we try to put names of chairs in the charter
14:21:49 <dsinger> q?
14:21:49 <fantasai> plh: I don't remember AC review opposing chairs
14:21:51 <dsinger> ack ds
14:21:54 <dsinger> ack plh
14:21:55 <fantasai> plh: but there have indeed been tricky cases in the past
14:22:19 <fantasai> jeff: On this particular PR I agree with Florian and plh
14:22:23 <plh> jeff: on this particular pull request, I concur
14:22:31 <fantasai> jeff: But cwilso is raising a larger issue I'm concerned about
14:22:31 <plh> ... chris is raising a larger issue however
14:22:41 <fantasai> jeff: There are a lot of things the Team's been doing under the Director's delegation for a long time
14:22:49 <fantasai> jeff: I'm not sure we've systematically thought through how we want all those to land
14:22:55 <fantasai> jeff: I'm not sure going through issue by issue isthe right approach
14:23:16 <fantasai> jeff: Example that sits in my mind is typically if a WG wants to take a document to PR, that's a Director decision
14:23:22 <fantasai> jeff: Ralph makes that on behalf of the Director
14:23:37 <fantasai> jeff: He checks a bunch of things about the document to make sure it's done properly
14:23:48 <fantasai> jeff: That transition is done on behalf of the Director by the Team
14:23:57 <fantasai> jeff: If not Director, who makes that decision?
14:24:04 <fantasai> jeff: Doubt Council will do it
14:24:11 <dsinger> q+ dsinger
14:24:14 <fantasai> jeff: If no check, then have to just trust the WG
14:24:24 <fantasai> jeff: Need to think through the whole flow ...
14:24:35 <fantasai> jeff: I know today was supposed to do the "easy" ones, but we need a systematic approach
14:24:46 <fantasai> florian: The one Jeff raised is on my radar
14:24:49 <dsinger> ack flo
14:24:52 <jeff> q-
14:24:53 <dsinger> ack je
14:24:54 <fantasai> florian: I have a different answer than here
14:25:09 <fantasai> florian: I do think we should go piece by piece, because if we wait until we agree on everything to do anything, we are not going to make progress
14:25:22 <fantasai> florian: Right now, aligning the Process with what we do today
14:25:31 <fantasai> florian: and where we are uneasy about it, raise issues and work on them
14:25:43 <dsinger> q?
14:25:45 <fantasai> florian: For the other issue, I am preparing a PR for that also
14:26:04 <fantasai> florian: But cwilso, would you be comfortable landing this now and addressing conflicts later?
14:26:09 <fantasai> cwilso: Not going to block
14:26:19 <fantasai> cwilso: Just want to bring up that this needs to be addressed
14:26:22 <fantasai> cwilso: It's increasingly a problem
14:26:33 <fantasai> cwilso: Lots of concerns wrt bias in chairing
14:26:53 <fantasai> cwilso: In the past, in retrospect, are we going to formally object to the appointment of a chair?
14:26:59 <fantasai> cwilso: that's an elephant gun solution
14:27:28 <weiler> q+
14:27:29 <plh> q+
14:27:30 <fantasai> cwilso: but also Team swapping chairs, with first notice being opportunity to object, is not great
14:27:37 <fantasai> cwilso: Should make it possible to fix before getting to FO
14:27:59 <dsinger> q?
14:28:03 <dsinger> ack weil
14:28:03 <fantasai> cwilso: So no objection to merging, but do want to fix the larger problem
14:28:25 <fantasai> weiler: I'm very sympathetic to the issue
14:28:33 <fantasai> weiler: of "wait, first we heard about this, it's a done deal"
14:28:40 <fantasai> weiler: I'm trying to work out though from a management standpoint
14:28:45 <fantasai> weiler: if a chair appointment gets objected to
14:29:01 <fantasai> weiler: if plh is in situation of "need to appoint a chair, because down to zero chairs"
14:29:07 <fantasai> weiler: a slow-track process is going to be very painful
14:29:19 <fantasai> weiler: can we meet your concern without stop-energy black hole
14:29:21 <dsinger> q?
14:29:43 <fantasai> florian: Briefly, my proposal is not to introduce the ability to FO, but understand that the Process currently allow this
14:29:45 <dsinger> ack plh
14:30:20 <fantasai> plh: Reminds me, how do we make changes to charters after AC review and before approval
14:30:33 <fantasai> plh: We make changes, but there was complaints that no review of those changes
14:30:43 <fantasai> plh: We didn't start by changing Process, but updating guidebook for the Team
14:30:56 <fantasai> plh: requiring Team to circulate proposal to those who responded
14:31:08 <fantasai> plh: We're not saying Team cannot make initial decision, but document how it's done
14:31:25 <fantasai> plh: How to balance that with not having a chair for a long time...
14:31:31 <fantasai> plh: But the guidebook can be more precise
14:31:35 <jrosewell> IMO in a consensus driven organization then appointing chairs that are capable of gaining consensus seems pretty fundamental and therefore the working group's purpose would be in question if chairs can't be agreed.
14:31:38 <dsinger> ack ds
14:31:49 <fantasai> dsinger: My conclusion is we should pull this PR to document reality
14:31:57 <fantasai> dsinger: comment in 281 or file a new issue if needed
14:32:01 <cwilso> q+
14:32:10 <fantasai> dsinger: I think an FO is in-your-face and rather too public about questions about a perosn
14:32:20 <fantasai> dsinger: I think we might need a way for e.g. AB to mediate in camera
14:32:37 <fantasai> dsinger: In most cases, Team only has a candidate
14:32:46 <fantasai> dsinger: if more candidates, maybe should hold votes
14:33:06 <fantasai> dsinger: I'm unsure about Team handling cases where there are conflicting visions for chairing the WG
14:33:24 <fantasai> cwilso: I think 281 is about objecting to appointments
14:33:33 <fantasai> cwilso: Should I open a new WG about figuring out better process?
14:34:08 <fantasai> cwilso: Maybe we should change the title of the issue?
14:34:14 <fantasai> dsinger: Yes, let's do that, keeps all the discussion in one place
14:34:30 <dsinger> q?
14:34:34 <cwilso> ack cw
14:34:36 <dsinger> ack cwi
14:35:01 <fantasai> "With the input of the AB, the Team appoints the Chair"
14:35:01 <weiler> q+
14:35:08 <fantasai> fantasai: Maybe we should say the same for this appointment?
14:35:09 <dsinger> ack fant
14:35:13 <dsinger> ack wei
14:35:25 <fantasai> fantasai: "With the input of the WG members"
14:35:38 <fantasai> weiler: Want to urge caution about soliciting input
14:35:42 <fantasai> weiler: in a public way
14:35:55 <fantasai> weiler: I've done this for WG and it's a good change
14:36:01 <fantasai> weiler: but requiring it could have some bad impacts
14:36:08 <fantasai> weiler: and ability to select the best people
14:36:31 <fantasai> dsinger: I will note that in ???, an indicative vote is held
14:36:35 <fantasai> dsinger: and ????
14:36:50 <fantasai> dsinger: And in general there's widespread approval and the executive board signs off
14:36:51 <dsinger> s/???/INCITS/
14:37:31 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Land PR #559, continue discussing chair appointments in 281
14:37:35 <cwilso> Incidentally, I put a comment in 281 with a suggested title change - I don't have privileges to change the title myself.
14:37:48 <fantasai> florian: Last topic is MOUs
14:38:10 <fantasai> florian: Currently the person in charge of negotiating and signing is the Director
14:38:13 <plh> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/556
14:38:14 <fantasai> florian: This PR changes it to the CEO
14:38:24 <fantasai> florian: Implicitly under the supervision of the Board of Directors once we have one
14:38:26 <jeff> q+
14:38:34 <dsinger> ack jef
14:38:56 <fantasai> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/556
14:39:05 <fantasai> jeff: This PR is fine but
14:39:16 <fantasai> jeff: We have in our history one MOU which assigns directly specific responsibilities to the Director
14:39:20 <fantasai> jeff: which is the WHATWG-W3C MOU
14:39:34 <fantasai> jeff: I doubt that this PR is trying to assign those responsibilities in that MOU to the CEO
14:39:37 <fantasai> jeff: and would be a mistake to do so
14:39:43 <fantasai> jeff: but if we're moving forward with this PR
14:39:46 <plh> q+
14:39:52 <fantasai> jeff: need to document somewhere that we have this other open issue
14:39:55 <florian> q+
14:40:08 <fantasai> jeff: Maybe say in the PR, that this is strictly about approving new MOUs, and not assigning Director role in any existing MOU
14:40:22 <fantasai> dsinger: Can you file an issue that we have an existing MOU that mentions the Director?
14:40:24 <plh> --> https://www.w3.org/2019/04/WHATWG-W3C-MOU.html WHATWG/W3C MoU
14:40:29 <fantasai> dsinger: I think it's more of an AB issue than Process CG
14:40:33 <fantasai> jeff: Unsure how tracking
14:40:57 <fantasai> jeff: But Florian and I identified all the Director's responsibilities so we can address them, and this was included
14:41:09 <fantasai> jeff: Just as long as we're talking about MOUs, just wanted to raise it
14:41:30 <fantasai> dsinger: I put a comment in the PR that tis is only about negotiation, not about contents of MOU
14:41:48 <dsinger> q?
14:41:48 <fantasai> dsinger: but good point, we should follow up on that MOU
14:41:57 <dsinger> ack plh
14:42:02 <fantasai> plh: it does mean that we're going to have to review all our official documents
14:42:09 <fantasai> plh: and map from W3C Director to new process
14:42:12 <jeff> WHATWG, W3C MoU that was mentioned above --> https://www.w3.org/2019/04/WHATWG-W3C-MOU.html
14:42:25 <fantasai> plh: You're right in the case of the WHATWG case we will need to replace Director with the Council
14:42:38 <fantasai> plh: but each situation is different, so we will have to evaluate one by one
14:42:58 <dsinger> q?
14:43:18 <fantasai> jeff: I'll open in AB-memberonly?
14:43:28 <fantasai> cwilso: Yes, we need to track all of these and figure out how to edit those agreements
14:43:30 <dsinger> ack flo
14:43:52 <fantasai> florian: Just want to agree that this PR does not assign role of Director in MOU. It will be the CEO's responsibility to negotiate the update.
14:44:11 <fantasai> florian: and CEO should probably do that with advice of AB and the party we're negotiating with
14:44:26 <dsinger> q?
14:44:27 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Merge PR #556
14:45:06 <fantasai> dsinger: Please comment on issues and help us make progress
14:45:12 <fantasai> florian: Once we land these, btw, some of the issues will be closed
14:45:28 <fantasai> florian: I have another batch of PRs in preparation, but they are more tangled and more complicated than these
14:45:47 <wseltzer> wseltzer has joined #w3process
14:45:47 <fantasai> dsinger: Yes, and we'll have to evaluate the overall balance as well
14:46:21 <fantasai> dsinger: [discussion of issue management]
14:46:22 <wseltzer> present+
14:46:34 <wseltzer> rrsagent, pointer?
14:46:34 <RRSAgent> See https://www.w3.org/2021/10/06-w3process-irc#T14-46-34
14:46:36 <fantasai> dsinger: I wonder if we can close without action "Clearer wording for transition to obsolete status"
14:46:50 <fantasai> dsinger: It's been open since 2020, and we've asked repeatedly for text and haven't got it
14:46:56 <fantasai> dsinger: any objection to simply closing this issue?
14:47:07 <fantasai> florian: We said we'd soon close it in July 2019 ...
14:47:13 <fantasai> dsinger: It's editorial
14:47:17 <dsinger> q?
14:47:25 <fantasai> florian: and if someone comes up with something they can always open a PR
14:47:32 <fantasai> RESOVLED: Close that issue (whatever it was)
14:47:42 <fantasai> s/RESOVLED/RESOLVED/
14:47:43 <jeff> q+
14:47:49 <fantasai> dsinger: Next issue is horizontal review
14:47:56 <fantasai> dsinger: we have this documented now in /Guide
14:48:02 <dsinger> q?
14:48:04 <fantasai> dsinger: shall we close?
14:48:06 <dsinger> ack jef
14:48:21 <fantasai> jeff: I agree that we've effectively made it mandatory
14:48:33 <fantasai> jeff: wide review is mandatory, and HR is part of that
14:48:36 <fantasai> jeff: that works today in P2021
14:48:48 <fantasai> jeff: but mindful of what I said earlier: who is doing the checking in Director-free?
14:49:07 <fantasai> jeff: Today, Ralph acting as Director, interrogates the Team or Chair or whoever to make sure this was done
14:49:35 <fantasai> jeff: Who's doing this stuff? Unless someone's checking, mandate doesn't mean anything
14:49:44 <weiler> 1+
14:49:46 <weiler> q+
14:49:51 <weiler> s/1+//
14:49:56 <dsinger> I think that the team is the right place to be checking that mandates are obeyed
14:49:57 <fantasai> jeff: Closing this is fine, but I'm concerned closing all the reminders of things that we need to address
14:49:59 <dsinger> q?
14:50:14 <fantasai> dsinger: [comment above]
14:50:28 <florian> q+
14:50:30 <dsinger> ack fant
14:50:51 <fantasai> dsinger: If there something we didn't address, please open a new issue.
14:50:54 <dsinger> ack wei
14:50:58 <fantasai> weiler: If we're talking about #394?
14:50:59 <dsinger> ack flo
14:51:00 <fantasai> dsinger: yes
14:51:02 <fantasai> weiler: fine with closing
14:51:07 <fantasai> florian: also fine with closing
14:51:21 <fantasai> florian: also agree that Team being in the business of checking is right
14:51:31 <fantasai> florian: especially since these are initiated not by the Team, for them to check is fine
14:51:40 <fantasai> florian: This is a part that I'm not that worried about the Director stepping away
14:51:47 <fantasai> florian: ...
14:51:53 <jrosewell> q+
14:52:11 <dsinger> ack jrose
14:52:28 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Close #394
14:53:00 <fantasai> Topic: Scheduling
14:53:18 <fantasai> dsinger: I'll be away on Oct 27th, prefer not to chair
14:53:22 <fantasai> jeff: It's also during TPAC
14:53:28 <dsinger> q?
14:53:33 <fantasai> dsinger: So for both those reasons, I think we should cancel
14:53:39 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Cancel Oct 27th meeting
14:54:04 <fantasai> dsinger: Meeting after that would be the 10th of November
14:54:19 <fantasai> dsinger: Any other business?
14:54:20 <dsinger> q?
14:54:20 <jrosewell> q+
14:54:23 <jrosewell> Should we cancel
14:54:53 <fantasai> jrosewell: next meeting after that is the 24th of November, should we cancel that because right before Thanksgiving?
14:54:54 <dsinger> q?
14:54:56 <fantasai> dsinger: yes
14:54:59 <fantasai> Meeting closed.
14:55:00 <dsinger> ack jrose
15:14:19 <wseltzer> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:14:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/06-w3process-minutes.html wseltzer
15:55:15 <tantek> tantek has joined #w3process
18:09:02 <Zakim> Zakim has left #w3process
18:48:50 <MacTed> MacTed has joined #w3process
18:55:01 <tantek> tantek has joined #w3process
22:07:19 <plh_> plh_ has joined #w3process
22:31:04 <tantek> tantek has joined #w3process
23:59:09 <jeff> jeff has joined #w3process