In terms of process wouldn’t it be better to stick to more common ways how Github project workflows are done?
- There are many long-open issues. Original posters may have moved on, lost their interest to review.
- There are deliverables to create: Errata, a primer, whatever-else-is-needed …
So that might be done with:
- A project Kanban board: Todo, Triaged, In Progress, Review, Done.
- Corresponding labels if needed, to add to the issues being processed.
- Texts of deliverables are Markdown revision-tracked in the repo.
- People assign to open issues, create PR’s to deliverables, update the board.
- Issue and/or PR reaches Review stage. By rule N reviewers should approve.
- Then the PR is merged and Issue is Done, gets closed.
- Definition of Done includes → Update channel: W3C Wiki, Notify community: SWICG mailing list.