Stream: fhir/infrastructure-wg
Topic: Ballot disposition
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 03:07):
I'm really not sure what to do with GF#17000
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 03:08):
or GF#16999
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 03:08):
I guess we could say 'we agree, thanks for your comment'?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 13 2018 at 03:25):
They're "A-C" ballots. The only thing you can really do with them is block vote them as "Considered - No action required".
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 04:51):
we're not putting neg-mj issues in block votes? or can we?
(candidates: GF#16470, GF#16460, GF#16457, GF#16456, GF#16450, GF#16329, GF#16316, GF#16313, GF#14298, GF#17037, GF#16310, GF#14027, GF#16318)
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 05:29):
ok. FHIR-I curently has 145 undisposed issues from the core normative ballot. I have put 93 of them in a block vote (block vote 3). The rest are either in
- ready to vote (16)
- fit for teleconference (20)
- normative-substantiative (5)
- there's a few waiting for input
only one of the block vote items is labelled as 'in-person' and that is a persuasive affirmative
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 05:31):
.. please can we dispose neg-mj in the block vote...
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 13 2018 at 11:51):
No problem with disposing of negatives in the block vote. Where it gets trickier is if they're "in person". For those, we need to engage with the balloter and confirm that they're ok with the block vote resolution. Alternatively we schedule a call where they can say their piece.
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 13 2018 at 11:53):
Did you look at the non-ballot ones?
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 12:53):
doing non ballot ones next
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 12:54):
the problem with in-person is that there's a fundamental inequity here. Some balloters made very thoughtful comments that will make us think hard, calling them affirmative and not in -person, while other people made typo's as in-person neg-mj. We really need some way to say 'no, you can't waste committee time like that'
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 12:57):
anyway, I'll move some of the neg-mj into the block vote
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 13 2018 at 12:57):
If we find something persuasive (e.g. a typo), in-person doesn't apply.
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 13 2018 at 12:57):
Note that Neg-Mj is just really "Neg" now - we no longer distinguish major and minor.
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 12:59):
so your comments remain too dense. 14027 - does the comment mean that this is the clone, or that this is the original to call out of scope?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 13 2018 at 13:01):
This one is the incorrectly-submitted ballot and is marked as Not Related. The clone wouldn't be tied to a ballot and will be dispositioned normally
Grahame Grieve (Jun 13 2018 at 13:01):
ok. I figured this out. but using some prepositions will make it easier for people in the future
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:13):
so now we have 175 items in the block vote. Given it's size, we should split it up and get it out in 3 -4 blocks ASAP for vote after dev days
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:16):
that leaves us with ~75 tasks I could not block vote. There;s no way we're getting through that. (there's about 50 parked in other places). we have to get through about 30 of them for ballot reasons. I've pushed harder in the block vote on non-ballot stuff.
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:18):
so we need to ask for comments on the other 40 or so that we won't be getting to. to see if we can move some into the block vote
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:21):
the other thing is, I'm not going to get everything done. that's already obvious. There's one very big task that I had intended to do before the second ballot: update the R2 <-> R3 maps to R3 <-> R4. That won't be happening
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 02:24):
My leaning would be to leave it as a single block vote and schedule it for 2 weeks from Monday. That gives 2.5 weeks to review. Splitting it up into parts doesn't really help And I'd rather know sooner than later if something is being pulled.
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 02:24):
In terms of applying changes, non-substantive changes can be made after the ballot opens.
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:25):
I thought it would help if we split it into :
- ballot not persusaive of some kind
- ballot persausive
- everything else
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:25):
In terms of applying changes, non-substantive changes can be made after the ballot opens.
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:25):
even for normative? have we ever done that elsehwere? I think not
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 02:25):
We could, but everyone can see the resolution in the block vote list
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:25):
but not it's ballot status, no?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 02:25):
Non-substantive changes are allowed to be made for "found issues"
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 02:26):
In this case, they'd be known issues. And we could even point to them in the ballot if people cared to look.
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:26):
how can we point to them in the ballot if they're not in the ballot?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 02:27):
We could include a list of gforge links to unapplied non-substantive changes.
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:36):
THere's 23 MnM tasks... I'm going to set up a block vote there too
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 02:37):
I already did for the ready-for-vote ones. Forgot to mark them as BlockVote 1 though
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:37):
ok I'll use ready-to-vote
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 02:40):
I mean I've already sent out a block vote notice. If you add new ones, make them block vote 2 and send a separate email
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 02:41):
oh? I didn't see that. ok. I'll do that
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 07:06):
ok 9 on our telecon list, and a block vote of 6
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 07:06):
existing block vote is 5
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 12:38):
Will you send out an email to the list with the second block vote? You know where the block vote transform is?
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 12:41):
no. haven't got to the transform bit
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 12:46):
FHIR-documents/tracker/tools/TrackerToEmail.xslt
Rob Hausam (Jun 14 2018 at 14:34):
@Lloyd McKenzie Is that likely a generally usable transform (maybe with some customization)?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 14:37):
It's generally useable for FHIR gForge. If you wanted to use it for non-FHIR gForge, customization would be required.
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 14:49):
The link to it can be found in the wiki page linked to from the tracker
Grahame Grieve (Jun 14 2018 at 20:19):
how do you use this xslt? is there a documented process?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 14 2018 at 20:57):
In the wiki. Essentially, filter to the block vote items, do an XML export, run the transform on it. It'll generate both HTML and mediawiki content you can copy & paste
John Moehrke (Jun 14 2018 at 21:29):
would be nice if someone would add another button that just does that...
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 15 2018 at 00:37):
If we had the power, we would have...
Grahame Grieve (Jun 15 2018 at 05:57):
added GF#14170 to the block vote; that might be controversial?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jun 15 2018 at 11:02):
No objections here...
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
