View source for Shepherding old tracker-issues

<html>
<style>p, li { font-family: Raleway, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; }</style>
</html>



As time passes, issues build up in the tracker page, and it is necessary to check whether (especially the older) issues are still relevant, or whether some action needs to be taken. This is the process of 'shepherding' the issues, and here we list some pointers that may be useful to the shepherd.

The basic process consists of 
# looking at the list of open issues in the tracker
# choosing several, and reviewing their status
# briefly describing the status in a comment on the tracker-issue, and
# adding any appropriate labels to the tracker-issue
# compiling a list of issues for the attention of the i18n WG, and sending the list out as an agenda+ with a request that WG members familiarise themselves with the issues so that they can be discussed during the i18n telecon. The agenda+ should be sent out sufficiently in advance of the telecon to allow for WG members to check the issues in advance (trying to familiarise oneself with the issue during the telecon seldom produces results, and eats up significant amounts of time.
# after WG discussion, summarise the conclusion of the WG (using, where appropriate, the mins2issue tool)
# then apply any other appropriate labels and take the action recommended by the i18n WG.

WG-issues that are closed by the non-i18n-WG are labelled by the person who is keeping tracker issues up to date. These are also a prime candidate for this activity.

Particularly useful labels include the following:
* '''Waiting''': we are waiting for the other WG to complete edits, tests, etc. or to simply respond to the comments
* '''Dormant''': ?
* '''Deferred''': ?
* '''Recycle''': (with closed status) we will re-raise this issue if/when a new version of the spec is produced
* '''Needs review''': requires the WG to review the comment carefully