[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Collating responses to our request for input

Dear all,

We said we'd work together to collate responses to our request for input
in advance of our BoF and I was meant to get that activity started ten
days ago, but I failed to do this.  I'm sorry about this -- I've been on
a sort-of vacation and haven't been looking at my scheduled tasks in the
way I normally would.

I have, however, been gathering message-ids of feedback we received, and
this morning I've gone through these and extracted those which I think
are broadly in line with our interests and intentions for this reform
project, such that we should try to incorporate them into our plan for
the talk.

I've extracted a few bullet points from each item to make it easier to
slot these into a talk plan, but we'd want to reread the actual mail
when doing that, rather than relying on my bullet points.


  - still no design work, but ideas and working groups

  - issue opinions on parameters an ideal solution would have then
    endorse the design


  - we should carefully explain the "no design work" thing to avoid
    misunderstanding and sidetracking (incorporate Marga's reply to
    Holger's message)


  - explain how we handle non-technical issues at present

  - explain what is done to mitigate the TC being a nuclear option, plus
    possibility of using former TC members for this


  - when it comes to non-technical issues, we should consider focusing
    on the problem of replacing maintainers, as we're the only body that
    can do this

  - descriptions of how replacing maintainers doesn't work so well atm


  - useful remarks on private discussions

  - what could go wrong if we allow some way of doing design work
    [I think Matthew is onto something important here]

  - separate body which is not one of last resort.

There were some other messages which were certainly interesting, but
which I didn't think could be actionable within our current conception
of the scope of the reform project.  But we could come back to them
after the current project has concluded.

Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: