On 8/2/19 1:23 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
On 2 Aug 2019, at 10:17 am, Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Keeping track of "issues" can be appropriate when a document is in a fairly mature state. Before that point, however, if discussion must be couched in terms of "issues", whoever gets to define the "issues" wins the battles.
In the WGs I'm involved in, anyone can define an issue (at least for the first part of the work). It causes a certain amount of noise, but it's worth it.
Yeah, it's not that having the ability to track issues is bad, it's just
that additional discipline is required to make it work.
It's a bit like working group scope - if the scope is defined poorly the whole output of the WG is likely to be useless or worse.
That never happens around here, surely?
LOL.
Keith
