Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 4 Next »

\uD83D\uDDD3 Date

\uD83D\uDC65 Participants

\uD83E\uDD45 Goals

\uD83D\uDDE3 Discussion topics

Time

Item

Presenter

Notes

10 minutes

vdW methods and periodicity:

MT

15-30 minutes

Committee tempo/ procedures

JW + DM

  • Recap issues discussed previously in /wiki/spaces/MEET/pages/2590736396

    • Brief summary: Current process owned too much by infrastructure team, including:

      • (possibly) Define spec change

      • Review change, discuss spec change, answer questions, defend spec change, carefully consider all aspects

      • Get all stakeholders to agree/iterate to convergence

      • Implement

    • Creates perverse/adverse incentives: Requires a huge amount of work to define the work that needs to be done.

    • Possible new procedure:

      • The infrastructure team is only involved in review, final approval, and implementation; there needs to be another driver

        • Driver has the right to limit scope, e.g. “This is a good thing to consider but falls outside scope of current proposal; suggester can create new proposal and be driver on that”

      • Relevant committee commits to meet at some predictable frequency to make synchronous decisions

    • Suggested monthly meeting

      • Should we change committee composition and/or requirements to make a recurring meeting? Or schedule one-off each month?





✅ Action items

  •  

⤴ Decisions

  • No labels