You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
At a recent joint WHATWG/CSSWG/OpenUI meeting, some concerns were raised around standards positions and early shipping of features. The concern was that marking a standards position "positive" unblocks shipment of features, perhaps before all details are worked out. While there are other safeguards against that, e.g. editor review and approval of the PR, it seems to make sense to bring the WHATWG stages process to the WHATWG PR template. For example, there seem to be two options to get a PR landed: 1) get standards positions from two implementers, or 2) get the proposal to stage 3.
Can we update the template accordingly?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
At a recent joint WHATWG/CSSWG/OpenUI meeting, some concerns were raised around standards positions and early shipping of features. The concern was that marking a standards position "positive" unblocks shipment of features, perhaps before all details are worked out. While there are other safeguards against that, e.g. editor review and approval of the PR, it seems to make sense to bring the WHATWG stages process to the WHATWG PR template. For example, there seem to be two options to get a PR landed: 1) get standards positions from two implementers, or 2) get the proposal to stage 3.
Can we update the template accordingly?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: