[tei-council] SF Tickets getting agreement on Council mailing list

[James Cummings]

On 20/12/12 14:14, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
> James, I'm confused.  You said:
>
> On 12/20/12 4:29 AM, James Cummings wrote:
>> So if you want to ensure you get particular tickets go to
>> http://purl.org/tei/fr
>> and set assignee to 'nobody' and status to 'open' and click Filter.
>> Likewise with http://purl.org/tei/bug
>
> but this will just let you find unassigned tickets (those that haven't
> yet been "triaged").  Are you suggesting that people then claim any
> tickets they're interested in, by assigning them to themselves?


Correct! Exactly that! Apologies, I thought that was clear. I 
have no desire to stop people working on tickets they are 
interested in implementing... quite the reverse.  Sadly we all 
have to work on some tickets we're less interested in completing 
as well. :-)  I'll assign the rest in another few days.

What I'd like also to do is to get a workflow agreed going for 
assenting to decisions made on tickets as well. For example, 
Sebastian's asking about @defaultVal highlights that we probably 
want to be able to assume that silence equals assent as long as 
there has been a suitable period of time, a reminder, and any 
discussion summarised on the ticket. This should probably be for 
'green' categorised tickets (or corrigible bugs) since 'amber' 
implies they need further discussion. I want to remove any 
roadblocks from us completing tickets but also keep Council 
oversight of them. We all volunteer our work at different times 
and are usually very busy with all sorts of other concerns.

Any thoughts?

-James


-- 
Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings at it.ox.ac.uk
Academic IT Services, University of Oxford