14:02:03 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #w3process
14:02:05 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/06/22-w3process-irc
14:02:05 <weiler> present=
14:02:13 <weiler> present+
14:02:17 <weiler> present+ fantasai
14:02:29 <weiler> present+ wseltzer
14:02:35 <weiler> present+ plh
14:02:37 <weiler> present+ florian
14:02:50 <plh> plh has joined #w3process
14:02:58 <plh> agenda+ Issues up for closure
14:02:58 <plh> agenda+ Community Groups and Business Groups should be incorporated into the Process
14:02:58 <plh> agenda+ Director-Free: Recusal from W3C Council
14:02:58 <plh> agenda+ Let the Team rather than the Director handle progression on TR
14:02:59 <plh> agenda+ Maturity Level is a weird term
14:02:59 <plh> agenda+ TAG Appointment: Review the proposal before sending it to the AB
14:03:00 <plh> agenda+ Process 2022 issues
14:03:02 <plh> plh has changed the topic to: Next Process CG: June 22
14:03:19 <plh> zakim, clear agenda
14:03:20 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:03:26 <plh> agenda+ Issues up for closure
14:03:26 <plh> agenda+ Community Groups and Business Groups should be incorporated into the Process
14:03:26 <plh> agenda+ Director-Free: Recusal from W3C Council
14:03:26 <plh> agenda+ Let the Team rather than the Director handle progression on TR
14:03:27 <plh> agenda+ Maturity Level is a weird term
14:03:27 <plh> agenda+ TAG Appointment: Review the proposal before sending it to the AB
14:03:28 <plh> agenda+ Process 2022 issues
14:03:32 <fantasai> ScribeNick: fantasai
14:03:41 <plh> Regrets+ DavidS
14:03:49 <plh> regrets+ ChrisW
14:04:07 <weiler> present+ jeff
14:04:28 <fantasai> plh: Process is going to mainly manufactured by the Team, given attendance today.
14:04:32 <fantasai> Topic: Issue to close
14:04:40 <fantasai> plh: Two issues candidate to close
14:04:41 <wseltzer_bot> +1 to close
14:04:58 <fantasai> s/Issue to close/Review of Agenda/
14:05:04 <fantasai> plh: recusal from council
14:05:18 <fantasai> plh: pull request from Florian on Director-free
14:05:26 <fantasai> plh: issue from fantasai about "Maturity Level"
14:05:29 <Ralph> Ralph has joined #w3process
14:05:34 <fantasai> plh: and TAG appointments, to review where we are on the issue
14:05:35 <Ralph> present+
14:05:41 <fantasai> plh: If we have time, we can do any other 2022 issue
14:05:46 <fantasai> plh: Should we dive in?
14:05:49 <fantasai> florian: Dive!
14:05:52 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:05:52 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Issues up for closure -- taken up [from plh]
14:06:00 <plh> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/443
14:06:03 <fantasai> Topic: Issues for Closure
14:06:05 <fantasai> Subtopic: Stronger emphasis on reaching Recommendation
14:06:16 <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/443
14:06:36 <fantasai> plh: Any objections to close this issue? We have an open PR on the Guide, and no proposals for altering the Process
14:06:39 <fantasai> florian: Close it
14:06:46 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Close #443
14:06:57 <plh> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/462
14:07:10 <fantasai> Subtopic: Process should requre CR transition to document plan for CR exit
14:07:19 <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/462
14:07:24 <fantasai> weiler: [describes issue]
14:07:28 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:07:28 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Community Groups and Business Groups should be incorporated into the Process -- taken up [from plh]
14:07:31 <fantasai> various: let's close
14:07:38 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Close #462
14:07:39 <wseltzer> +1 to close without change
14:07:45 <fantasai> Topic: CG and BG processes into Process
14:07:53 <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/409
14:08:00 <fantasai> plh: I fear we have other priorities
14:08:11 <fantasai> plh: Are we OK to defer this yet again?
14:08:47 <weiler> fantasai: this is a big topic; I'm not sure what's being proposed is the way forward
14:08:58 <fantasai> plh: Doubt more important than DF
14:09:04 <fantasai> plh: Proposal is to defer yet again
14:09:06 <fantasai> florian: Yes, defer
14:09:17 <fantasai> florian: They are *mentioned* in the Process, but defined elsewhere
14:09:20 <jeff__> q+
14:09:49 <fantasai> jeff__: Small thing related to this context, have we made adequately clear that CEPC applies to CGs and BGs?
14:09:58 <fantasai> wseltzer: Yes, it is in the Join to those groups
14:10:03 <weiler> q+
14:10:05 <fantasai> jeff__: To me that's the most important linkage that we might have
14:10:08 <plh> ack jeff
14:10:17 <fantasai> weiler: Rather than merely defer, how are we going ot get communities to tackle this?
14:10:18 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #w3process
14:10:20 <fantasai> weiler: It's bigger than us
14:10:26 <plh> ack weiler
14:10:26 <fantasai> weiler: How do we get tackle
14:10:38 <fantasai> florian: I don't even know what we're trying to achieve, and we have other things we do want to achieve
14:10:46 <fantasai> florian: if can wrap it up in 5min... otherwise defer
14:10:57 <fantasai> weiler: not defer for us to do later, but kick it to some other part of community
14:11:09 <fantasai> plh: We are the community. We're the CG for the Process
14:11:14 <wseltzer> [Unless someone who proposes an alternative comes forward, I think we drop it.]
14:11:16 <fantasai> plh: If someone wants to work on this, not going to object for sure
14:11:22 <fantasai> plh: do we need to actively assign the work?
14:11:28 <fantasai> plh: is deferred, not closed
14:11:38 <fantasai> plh: I just want to send a clear signal that we don't have resources right now to take care of it
14:12:10 <Ralph> scribe+
14:12:23 <florian> fantasai: much of why CG's need more process is because they're trying to do things that should be done in WGs
14:12:30 <Ralph> scribe-
14:12:36 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:12:36 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Director-Free: Recusal from W3C Council -- taken up [from plh]
14:12:39 <florian> fantasai: so we should rather look into why they're doing that and fix that problem isntead
14:12:48 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Defer this cycle
14:12:50 <jeff__> q+
14:12:52 <fantasai> Topic: Recusal
14:12:56 <florian> q+
14:13:01 <fantasai> plh: We have some stuff in Process, do we need to put more?
14:13:11 <fantasai> plh: We can always put stuff in the Guide, which is easier to change
14:13:17 <Ralph> ["recusal" is not the currently preferred term]
14:13:18 <fantasai> plh: Harder to enforce, though, because not part of process
14:13:30 <plh> ack jeff
14:13:43 <jeff__> qq+
14:13:52 <fantasai> plh: Question is, do we have enough in the Process for this today?
14:13:59 <fantasai> plh: Last time I checked it doesn't reflect what we're actually doing
14:14:08 <fantasai> plh: Either need to change experiment or process
14:14:10 <plh> ack jeff
14:14:10 <Zakim> jeff__, you wanted to react to jeff__
14:14:15 <Ralph> -> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Drafts/director-free/#council "5.7.2. The W3C Council" Director-free draft
14:14:34 <fantasai> jeff__: In my mind, recusal is not unrelated to dismissal, and dissatisfied that dismissal is working as we need it to
14:14:43 <fantasai> jeff__: Too early to come to a conclusion, need to keep experimenting
14:14:50 <fantasai> jeff__: basis for my dissatisfaction is twofold
14:15:12 <fantasai> jeff__: First of all, we've had successful Councils formed where potentia beneficiaries of the decisions have not been dismissed
14:15:13 <Ralph> rrsagent, please make record public
14:15:15 <wseltzer> q+
14:15:51 <wseltzer> q-
14:16:14 <wseltzer> s/jeff__: First of all, we've had successful Councils formed where potentia beneficiaries of the decisions have not been dismissed//
14:16:29 <wseltzer> rrsagent, please make record member until cleaned up
14:16:29 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'please make record member until cleaned up', wseltzer.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
14:16:58 <fantasai> s/basis for my dissatisfaction is twofold/I think we need a post-mortem for the experiments/
14:17:19 <wseltzer> s/rrsagent, please make record member until cleaned up//
14:17:39 <plh> ack florian
14:17:51 <fantasai> florian: I thin what's in process is neither too much nor enough, it's outdated
14:18:03 <fantasai> florian: I think we action me to update
14:18:13 <fantasai> florian: and we can point at whereever we're maintaining the dismissal thing or whatever
14:18:29 <jeff__> q+ to florian
14:18:32 <fantasai> florian: eventually the Process should be updated with it, but for now let's just stick an issue in the Process to mark as Work in Progress
14:18:34 <jeff__> +1 to florian
14:18:34 <plh> ack jeff
14:18:34 <Zakim> jeff__, you wanted to florian
14:18:36 <jeff__> q-
14:18:38 <plh> q+
14:18:41 <plh> ack plh
14:18:53 <fantasai> plh: Fine with putting an issue and deferring conversation
14:19:17 <fantasai> plh: 2 questions, if we defer, should be deferring after TPAC. But that might push us later into 2023
14:19:23 <fantasai> florian: I think this is up to AB
14:19:34 <fantasai> florian: They need to say what rules we adopt
14:19:52 <fantasai> plh: Was going to ask if we're right group to discuss these things
14:20:04 <fantasai> florian: We're the right group to draft text, but the AB needs to say what to draft
14:20:26 <fantasai> plh: The AB is super busy...
14:20:40 <fantasai> florian: I'm in both groups, and we have quite a few members here who are regulars of the AB
14:20:46 <jeff__> q+
14:20:51 <fantasai> florian: I don't feel this group is the right group to draw conclusions from the experiments
14:20:52 <plh> ack jeff
14:21:08 <fantasai> jeff__: I think that for the entire Process, it's managed by the AB, and they delegate a lot of the work to us
14:21:18 <fantasai> jeff__: if they want to weigh in they can
14:21:23 <fantasai> jeff__: We work with the best information we have
14:21:38 <fantasai> plh: Any objection to defer until after TPAC this conversation, to allow experiments to proceed/
14:21:50 <fantasai> [discussion of timing]
14:22:06 <fantasai> plh: if AB doesn't get back to us by TPAC, we should try to make progress ourselves
14:22:27 <fantasai> florian: Meanwhile, action me to add an issue to Process
14:22:36 <fantasai> ACTION Florian: Add issue in Process about recusal/dismissal
14:23:37 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:23:37 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Let the Team rather than the Director handle progression on TR -- taken up [from plh]
14:23:43 <fantasai> plh: good at deferring things today...
14:23:52 <fantasai> Topic: Let the Team handle progression on TR
14:23:57 <plh> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/586
14:24:00 <fantasai> florian: fantasai and I looked at this
14:24:07 <plh> Github: https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/586
14:24:20 <fantasai> florian: There was request from Léonie that when Team moves things forward with weak justifications, Team needs to document it
14:24:23 <fantasai> florian: this was already in the text
14:24:47 <fantasai> florian: Also comment from dsinger wrt Team approving advancement on the REC track, not clearly tied to criteria in Process
14:24:58 <fantasai> florian: Director could block for any reason, not just procedural
14:25:17 <fantasai> florian: which wouldn't be fine in case of Team, so dsinger requested clarification that the Team is expected to assess the quality of the spec
14:25:23 <fantasai> florian: and not based on personal opinions
14:25:35 <fantasai> florian: so text has been updated to tie their approval to such requirements
14:25:43 <fantasai> florian: to avoid making it seem the Team can block based on their own feeling
14:26:13 <fantasai> florian: There was also something we noticed: a sentence saying that the Director (now Team) had the ability, without WG's approval, to take a REC-track document and move it down, e.g. CR to WD
14:26:27 <fantasai> florian: There is the ability to forcefully do this, and while unlikely to abused, felt more comfortable under just the Director than just the Team
14:26:38 <fantasai> florian: so we added the fact that if the Team wants to do this, it needs the approval of the AB and TAG
14:26:46 <fantasai> florian: so that's a new idea for your consideration
14:27:03 <fantasai> florian: I think if we need ability to forcefully downgrade a document, should get some approval
14:27:13 <fantasai> plh: We can review at the next meeting
14:27:17 <fantasai> plh: Any questions about this?
14:27:54 <weiler> scribe+
14:27:57 <fantasai> fantasai: Just recommend to review the PR commit by commit, because we both changed and moved some text, easier to review move and changes separately
14:28:19 <fantasai> plh: Encourage Ralph to look at this, since the Team is functionally Ralph in a lot of those cases
14:28:43 <fantasai> florian: PR isn't intended to change anything that we're actually doing, should be compatible with existing practice
14:28:57 <fantasai> weiler: ?? question in that thread, Team's decision are objectable?
14:29:00 <fantasai> florian: yes
14:29:05 <fantasai> weiler: what about Director decision?
14:29:12 <fantasai> florian: Decisions -- all decisions -- are objectable
14:29:27 <fantasai> plh: New process clarifies that
14:30:02 <fantasai> florian: So goal is to land it next time?
14:30:03 <fantasai> plh: yep
14:30:07 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:30:07 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Maturity Level is a weird term -- taken up [from plh]
14:30:13 <fantasai> Topic: Maturity Level is a weird term
14:30:19 <weiler> scribe+
14:30:52 <weiler> fantasai: I filed this because we never use "maturity level" outside of the process doc, because it's so awkward.  People use other terms.
14:31:17 <weiler> ... I want us to pick a term than can be used comfortably outside the process.
14:31:28 <Ralph> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/455
14:31:32 <florian> q+
14:31:37 <weiler> ... I recommend "maturity stages"
14:31:42 <Ralph> Github: https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/455
14:31:53 <plh> ack florian
14:32:06 <weiler> ... this avoids conflict with "level of spec"
14:32:38 <weiler> florian: I don't have a strong opinion, but if we can land something , great.
14:32:44 <weiler> plh: prefer to not bikeshed this here.
14:32:55 <weiler> ... May I defer to florian and fantasai?
14:33:37 <weiler> fantasai: i proposed something.  if you weren't paying attention, you might not even notice the change.
14:34:01 <plh> q+
14:34:15 <plh> ack plh
14:34:26 <weiler> plh: my sense is thiat this isn't worth it.
14:34:47 <weiler> fantasai: the advantage is that people are obviously uncomfortable using "level".
14:35:32 <weiler> q+
14:35:44 <weiler> florian: this is used all over the place outside the process.
14:35:44 <fantasai> plh: HOw about make a PR and we'll discuss it
14:35:45 <plh> ack weiler
14:35:56 <fantasai> fantasai: That's a lot of work to get rejected if ppl don't like it
14:36:04 <fantasai> fantasai: decide the term, and then we'll make a PR
14:36:14 <fantasai> s/outside/inside/
14:36:26 <fantasai> weiler: I wonder if the issue is not the term, but that our ppl don' care about the different levels?
14:36:34 <fantasai> weiler: Not the term, but why do we have stages?
14:36:47 <fantasai> weiler: and in that case why bother
14:36:59 <weiler> fantasai: people do talk about them, but maybe with term "status".
14:37:07 <plh> https://www.w3.org/pubrules/doc/rules/?profile=REC also uses "maturity level"
14:37:15 <weiler> weiler: fine, then go paint the bikeshed.
14:37:19 <fantasai> plh, because it's closely linked to the Process
14:37:32 <weiler> plh: then go propose it and give it a month
14:37:39 <weiler> fantasai: I did it 2 years ago.
14:37:48 <weiler> plh: people pushed back then
14:38:00 <weiler> florian: I don't think "wait" works.  we did that.
14:38:11 <weiler> ... maybe "here's the action absent objections"
14:38:22 <weiler> plh: fine, so how long to allow for objections?  July 20?
14:39:32 <weiler> plh: done.
14:39:39 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:39:39 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- TAG Appointment: Review the proposal before sending it to the AB -- taken up [from plh]
14:39:57 <fantasai> Topic: TAG Appointments
14:40:05 <fantasai> florian: The general idea, we have a TAG election, and it elects part of the TAG
14:40:14 <fantasai> florian: We used to have 3 ppl appointed by Director, but we won't have a Director
14:40:17 <fantasai> florian: so what do we do?
14:40:30 <fantasai> florian: Current idea is to form a TAG Appointment Committee to do the appointing
14:40:30 <plh> Github: https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/608
14:40:44 <fantasai> florian: currently it's formed during the election, and makes a decision after the election
14:40:49 <fantasai> florian: in order to be able to balance the elected TAG
14:41:00 <fantasai> florian: That part isn't too complicated, what's complicated is who is on that committee?
14:41:10 <fantasai> florian: We had a notion that it would be a subset of TAG and subset of chairs
14:41:23 <fantasai> florian: fantasai observed that subsetting chairs is time-consuming, and maybe we can just take them all
14:41:35 <weiler> q+
14:41:46 <fantasai> florian: that gets us a broad community, can more easily see what expertise is missing
14:42:01 <fantasai> florian: So this gets us a simplified process for setting up the committee
14:42:22 <fantasai> weiler: So you think it's easier to get consensus in a larger group than to run random selection?
14:42:34 <fantasai> weiler: I think the question is, what's likely to get us to a better outcome
14:42:46 <fantasai> florian: getting consensus in a large group can take awhile
14:43:03 <fantasai> florian: subsetting is not just the random selection, you have to see if the selected ppl are willing to show up
14:43:11 <fantasai> florian: so you need to run the process multiple time
14:43:21 <fantasai> florian: ...
14:43:24 <Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+tag+label%3A%22Director-free%3A+TAG+Appointments%22 related issues labeled "Director-free: TAG Appointments"
14:43:31 <fantasai> florian: not conceptually hard, but it takes awhile to get to an actual set of people
14:43:40 <fantasai> weiler: I assume we can make that work
14:43:45 <plh> q+
14:43:48 <plh> ack weiler
14:43:51 <plh> ack plh
14:43:57 <fantasai> florian: That was the initial assumption, is why we wrote it that way
14:44:13 <fantasai> plh: I think I agree with Sam, easier to find consensus
14:44:25 <fantasai> plh: Also this would change the balance of the committee, because only one member of the Team
14:44:33 <fantasai> plh: and many chairs
14:44:57 <fantasai> plh: so I tend to agree with Sam, go through the pain of selecting 4 chairs
14:45:04 <fantasai> plh: so that we can save time getting consensus
14:45:15 <Ralph> scribe+
14:45:34 <florian> [by the way, the suggestion from fantasai I was commenting about is https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/608]
14:45:38 <Ralph> fantasai: I made the proposal from watching the Council experiment process run
14:45:57 <Ralph> ... I agree it's harder to get consensus in a larger group
14:46:15 <Ralph> ... it's easier to have some kinds of discussions in a smaller group
14:46:16 <jeff> jeff has joined #w3process
14:46:49 <Ralph> ... I was also concerned about the Team participant being drowned out
14:47:07 <fantasai> weiler: I've been on the IETF NomCom, 7 people appointing 3
14:47:14 <fantasai> weiler: It's a lot of work, it eats a lot of time
14:47:30 <fantasai> weiler: it's going to be simpler here, fact that you're selecting ppl for the same position (TAG member) simplifies it
14:47:37 <fantasai> weiler: but nom matter what it's a lot of work
14:47:53 <fantasai> weiler: From IETF experience, some things I might tweak in how you do it to address florian's concern around e.g. are they willing to
14:47:58 <fantasai> weiler: but I feel confident that we can make it work
14:48:25 <fantasai> weiler: It's not going to be "meet twice for 2hrs and we're done", but not a bad process, probably a good one
14:48:41 <fantasai> weiler: what is the question in front of us today?
14:49:01 <fantasai> florian: Question from fantasai is should we a) adopt immediatley b) reject immediatly c) ask more people to weigh in
14:49:19 <fantasai> florian: The version in the document is with subsetting, and issue #608 is about removing subsetting
14:49:44 <fantasai> florian: My feeling is this group leans against #608, but maybe give more airtime outside the group?
14:49:54 <fantasai> weiler: We're looking at 80-100 people, it would not be workable
14:50:09 <fantasai> weiler: you're not going to get consensus, and you won't get the kind of confidentiality you need
14:50:13 <fantasai> weiler: I would kill it right now
14:50:20 <fantasai> weiler: You cannot do this with 40 people, even
14:50:31 <fantasai> florian: fantasai, willing ot let go?
14:50:36 <Ralph> <ralph> +1; unworkable in practice
14:50:37 <fantasai> fantasai: yes, I defer to weiler's experience
14:51:00 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Close no change
14:51:30 <plh> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Director-free%3A+TAG+Appointments%22
14:51:36 <fantasai> florian: We do have a bunch of other issues about the TAC, I haven't looked at them in awhile
14:51:41 <fantasai> florian: encourage everyone to have a look
14:51:51 <fantasai> florian: otherwise, time we revisited those
14:51:51 <weiler> s/IETF NomCom,/IETF NomCom, which is 10 people (+ 5 not voting) appointing ~12; this is/
14:53:00 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:53:00 <Zakim> agendum 7 -- Process 2022 issues -- taken up [from plh]
14:53:12 <fantasai> Topic: Process 2022 Triage
14:53:32 <fantasai> plh: Looking for volunteers to prepare more of these for discussion
14:53:39 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:53:39 <Zakim> agendum 7 was just opened, plh
14:53:45 <plh> zakim, close agendum 7
14:53:45 <Zakim> agendum 7, Process 2022 issues, closed
14:53:46 <Zakim> I see nothing remaining on the agenda
14:53:49 <plh> zakim, move to next agendum
14:53:49 <Zakim> I do not see any more non-closed or non-skipped agenda items, plh
14:54:24 <fantasai> plh: 486 will be on next agenda
14:54:35 <fantasai> plh: Thanks everyone, let's continue next time
14:54:38 <fantasai> Meeting closed.
14:55:16 <wseltzer> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:55:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/06/22-w3process-minutes.html wseltzer
15:00:14 <Ralph> zakim, bye
15:00:14 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been weiler, fantasai, wseltzer, plh, florian, jeff, Ralph
15:00:14 <Zakim> Zakim has left #w3process
15:59:01 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #w3process