[Council] Moving Forward: Process

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Wed Mar 13 11:13:35 CST 2002


I like the overall process -- it means more work for us, but it will be
good work. :) I especially like the fact that it gives us an upper limit
on the time needed to ratify the JEP.

However, I have a few questions and clarifications, inline within....

> 3.) One week after submission to the Council, the JEP and the associated
> position paper will be released to the general populace of the Foundation.
> At this time, the JEP author may refine the draft as desired, based on the
> comments and input of the other members. This period of public commentary
> and discussion will last for no more than 2 weeks.

I would expect that this discussion will occur on the Standards-JIG list
but perhaps we don't need to specify that.

> 4.) After 2 weeks, the JEP author may then submit the JEP back to the
> Council for ratification as an official standard.  The Council will
> deliberate for one week and the final vote and justifications will be
> captured and made publicly available. At this time, the JEP will either be
> ratified or rejected.

What does it mean to be "ratified"? JEP-0001 outlines the process and
contains some pretty ASCII art (http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0001.html).
Right now the process for standards-track JEPs is from Proposed to Draft
to Final. In terms of a timeline, I would see the following for standards 
track JEPs:

Time Zero: JEP Author submits JEP to JEP Editor, who formats it and
presents it to the Jabber Council. JEP status is Proposed.

TZ + 1 Week: Council provides position paper on the JEP, which is
published by the JEP Editor and added to source control in the same
directory as the JEP doc itself. JEP status remains Proposed.

TZ + 3 Weeks: Public discussion of Proposed JEP. JEP Author makes
modifications if necessary. 

TZ + 4 Weeks: Council reviews the JEP again. Council either rejects the
JEP (status = Rejected) or approves the JEP (status = Draft).

TZ + 8 Weeks (?): JEP Author produces implementation and presents that to
the Council. Council either rejects the JEP (status = Rejected) or
approves the JEP (status = Final).

This is how I would read your proposal, but perhaps I've missed something.

Comments?

> JEP review is where we can start to make our impact on the community. It's
> an area where the community is weak at the moment. Let's make it better.

Heartily agreed.

--stpeter




More information about the Council mailing list