ISSUE-100: Should it be possible to publish a pr before a call for exclusion ends
PR in exclusion period
Should it be possible to publish a pr before a call for exclusion ends
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Document life cycle (pre 2014 chapter 7, now chapter 6)
- Raised by:
- Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile
- Opened on:
- 2014-06-12
- Description:
- The process doesn't have a requirement that W3C do not move a document to PR (or even Rec, although this requires very precisely meeting all time restrictions as deadlines). Should it do so?
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- RE: ISSUE-100 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-11-17)
- Re: ISSUE-100 (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2015-11-17)
- RE: ISSUE-100 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-11-17)
- ISSUE-100 (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2015-11-13)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force Tuesday, 17 March 2015 (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2015-03-16)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force Tuesday, 17 March 2015 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-03-16)
- Re: ISSUE-100 - going to PR with open exclusions (from singer@apple.com on 2015-03-10)
- Re: ISSUE-100 - going to PR with open exclusions (from art.barstow@gmail.com on 2015-03-10)
- ISSUE-100 - going to PR with open exclusions (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2015-03-10)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 3 March 2015 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-03-02)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 24 February 2015 (from singer@apple.com on 2015-02-24)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 24 February 2015 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-02-24)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 24 February 2015 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-02-24)
- List of Process Document Issue Not Currently Covered in the Process 2015 Draft being reviewed (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-02-08)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 27 January 2015 (from wayne.carr@linux.intel.com on 2015-01-28)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 27 January 2015 (from singer@apple.com on 2015-01-28)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 27 January 2015 (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2015-01-28)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 27 January 2015 (from singer@apple.com on 2015-01-28)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 27 January 2015 (from wayne.carr@linux.intel.com on 2015-01-27)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 27 January 2015 (from singer@apple.com on 2015-01-27)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 27 January 2015 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-01-26)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 20 January 2015a (from singer@apple.com on 2015-01-19)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 20 January 2015a (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-01-19)
- Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 13 January 2015a (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2015-01-13)
- call is at 1500Z (not 1400) EoM Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 13 January 2015a (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2015-01-13)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 13 January 2015a (from szilles@adobe.com on 2015-01-12)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 16 December 2014; Last Telcon of 2014; correcting the date (from szilles@adobe.com on 2014-12-16)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 17 December 2014; Last Telcon of 2014 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2014-12-15)
- Agenda Process Document Task Force 10 December 2014 (from szilles@adobe.com on 2014-12-08)
- Re: Issue-100 - proceeding with open exclusion periods (from wayne.carr@linux.intel.com on 2014-11-26)
- RE: Issue-100 - proceeding with open exclusion periods (from szilles@adobe.com on 2014-11-26)
- Re: Issue-100 - proceeding with open exclusion periods (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2014-11-26)
- Re: Issue-100 - proceeding with open exclusion periods (from wayne.carr@linux.intel.com on 2014-11-26)
- Issue-100 - proceeding with open exclusion periods (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2014-11-26)
- Re: incubation in CGs and W3C Notes when a WG drops work on a spec - was: Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from wayne.carr@linux.intel.com on 2014-06-19)
- Re: incubation in CGs and W3C Notes when a WG drops work on a spec - was: Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from singer@apple.com on 2014-06-19)
- RE: incubation in CGs and W3C Notes when a WG drops work on a spec - was: Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from Michael.Champion@microsoft.com on 2014-06-19)
- Re: incubation in CGs and W3C Notes when a WG drops work on a spec - was: Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from wayne.carr@linux.intel.com on 2014-06-19)
- Re: incubation in CGs and W3C Notes when a WG drops work on a spec - was: Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from singer@apple.com on 2014-06-19)
- Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from singer@apple.com on 2014-06-19)
- incubation in CGs and W3C Notes when a WG drops work on a spec - was: Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from wayne.carr@linux.intel.com on 2014-06-18)
- RE: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from Michael.Champion@microsoft.com on 2014-06-18)
- Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from singer@apple.com on 2014-06-18)
- Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from wayne.carr@linux.intel.com on 2014-06-18)
- Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2014-06-18)
- w3process-ISSUE-100 (PR in exclusion period): Should it be possible to publish a pr before a call for exclusion ends [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2014-06-12)
Related notes:
Not sure if this related PP FAQ entry has been associated with this issue:
http://www.w3.org/2003/12/22-pp-faq.html#mult-exclusions
I don't think I created this issue so changing `Raised By` to Chaals. Sorry Chaals :-).
If you can show evidence re who raised it, please let me know and I'll change it.
If it turns out I did indeed create this issue, I'll close it now because I think this is already (rightfully) practiced.
Display change log