RE: P&P: RE: Issues Log

["Chris Angus" <chris.angus@btinternet.com>]

Jim

I have tried to answer the points that you raise in your reply to me.  I am
wondering if, perhaps, you are reading too much into the term 'formal issue
log' (i.e. a log of 'formal issues')?

>         I'm all in favor of issue logs and other forms of management
> tools, but only as needed.

CJA: The procedure only says that "The  Work  Programme shall maintain a log
of  formal  issues raised  against the deliverable for a deliverable that
has reached Draft Deliverable level or beyond. The formal  issue log shall
be publicly available." and says that one may be useful at an earlier stage.
I do not think that it is calling for anything more than a record of the
issues that have been raised and for that record to be viewable by people
raising issues or otherwise interested in the deliverable.  I am still not
sure which of those two aspects you think that we can do without.

>         Back when we drafted the PAR, I was getting too many comments to
> informally deal with.  I sifted them into about 15 topics, gave them
> numbers, and it worked fine via the SUO email list.  If I had 150 issues,
> another approach would be needed, and if I had 1500 issues (as we could
> have with an ontology), it would need even more structure.

CJA: Very true, but the procedure doesn't mandate any particular approach,
mechanism or tool, it says no more than when formal issues are being raised
there should be a publicly available log (list?) of these issues and their
current status.

>         I feel we don't need written policy to tell editors that
> structure is needed to manage complexity.

CJA: But I don't think that the document says that.

>         I don't think any of the current starter documents would be
> helped much with an issues log.  If any of us feel it would help, let's
> spend our energy helping set up such logs.  If it does help, great, we'll
> encourage others to try, but let's not require it with a written policy.

CJA: I do not believe that the written policy does require it while they are
still starter documents, however I think that the process would probably be
helped by having a visible list of issues.  Apart from any other
considerations a log of known issues stops the same issue being raised time
and time again.  It also gives people some confidence that if they raise an
issue it will be dealt with in some way - even if it is (openly) rejected.

Regards
Chris