Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Decharter Intl WG #353

Closed
jasnell opened this issue Sep 15, 2017 · 16 comments
Closed

Decharter Intl WG #353

jasnell opened this issue Sep 15, 2017 · 16 comments
Labels

Comments

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Sep 15, 2017

I would like to propose dechartering the Intl WG in favor of it being a more informal Team. I'm not convinced that we ever really had much benefit of it being a formally chartered working group. A team would still be just as effective without having any of the additional overhead of a chartered working group.

ping @srl295

@fhinkel
Copy link
Member

fhinkel commented Oct 11, 2017

ping @srl295

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

@srl295 unless you object I'd agree that Intl could be a team.

@srl295
Copy link
Member

srl295 commented Oct 16, 2017

sure— sounds OK off the top of my head (and I'll go change my slides…)

@srl295
Copy link
Member

srl295 commented Oct 16, 2017

^ I could not find a lot of details on team vs. WG. I filed the above issue nodejs/Intl#45 over any changes that should happen to the Intl repo. In particular, does the Intl repo need to close, because there are some valuable issues there— but, they could move to issues in other repos but with appropriate tags.

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Oct 16, 2017

@srl295 Team = GitHub team, so @nodejs/intl would be the team. Yeah, not a lot of documentation on how that differs from a chartered WG. We could definitely improve there. The repo does not need to close. (Testing WG was de-chartered but the repo remains, for example.)

@srl295
Copy link
Member

srl295 commented Nov 1, 2017

What's the next step here?

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

Ping @nodejs/tsc

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Dec 11, 2017

Ping @nodejs/tsc

nodejs/nodejs.org#1513
#437

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Dec 11, 2017

Going through remaining open issues in https://github.com/nodejs/Intl/issues right now. Planning on archiving the repo (basically making it read-only) sooner or later.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

@srl295 earlier discussion was that the repo did not necessarily need to close if the WG became a team. Is the repo still useful for the team ?

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Dec 11, 2017

@mhdawson @srl295 OK, I won't archive the repo for now and I'll stop my march through all the issues to close them that I started a few minutes ago. It does seem that the Intl repo is a bit of a graveyard though. I think the issues in that repo would probably get more activity/visibility elsewhere.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Feb 17, 2018

The discussion appears to have stalled. What is the next step here?

@srl295
Copy link
Member

srl295 commented Feb 17, 2018

@jasnell did it? What's left to do? I have a PR nodejs/Intl#47 to redirect to i18n, and I'm going to go over the rest of the Intl issues and refile…

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Feb 17, 2018

The conversation in this thread did at least :-) Since there is actively happening elsewhere in the org, does this specific issue need to stay open?

@srl295
Copy link
Member

srl295 commented Feb 17, 2018 via email

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Feb 18, 2018

Thanks @srl295, I'll close this.

@cjihrig cjihrig closed this as completed Feb 18, 2018
bnb added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 8, 2018
Reference: #353

The i18n initiative from the CommComm has now superseded intl.
@bnb bnb mentioned this issue Mar 8, 2018
Trott pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 8, 2018
Reference: #353

The i18n initiative from the CommComm has now superseded intl.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants