Formalized procedures for breaking down bigger/long issue conversations

[yarikoptic]

I would really like to close more cans of worms than I'm opening here. How can we do that when the topic seems to be growing on this GitHub issue? Can we break this down into more actionable smaller conversations?

Originally posted by @ericearl in #2273

Not unlike "atomic" changes to BIDS spec itself, larger more complicated issues might need to be broken into smaller more actionable ones. To define those actionable items out of larger issues, I see following possible procedures:

Issues:
Let's discuss this aspect here in a separate issue. And such newish convenience feature of github as creation of new issues out from others might be one of the ways.

PRs: I also often prefer PRs over issues since then a specific point could be discussed in a thread which gets resolved and thus hidden away, instead of polluting a long thread in the issue. It works good for a while but eventually even issues might run away.

Discussions: There are also discussions -- we could try migrating this issue to discussion and then see what gets most votes among answers. I think overall we underuse discussions here so should we try here?

Face-to-face (zoom) meetups: I think even a brief 15-30 minutes interactive discussion but with clear question/agenda + procedure (e.g. X minutes to each party to state the case, up to Y minutes in replies etc) might be useful to avoid long chat "over the head" discussions in typing. (we all would need decent mics though! ;) )