u99127 commented on pull request #13: URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/13#issuecomment-887696764
> > I'd suggest that "nearly done" is ambiguous? As a less ambiguous alternative I'd propose always opening a tracking issue (if the RFC is big enough to require it) when you raise an RFC and if it ultimately gets rejected we just close the issue? This also allows code to evolve alongside the RFC. > > I was thinking about that too, but I'm afraid that it might be confusing to see lots of RFC tracking issues (even they are closed). After all, deleting an issue is not allowed in Github, so it should be better to do our best to have only the tracking issues of accepted RFCs. > Deleting an issue is not something we should do - keeping a record of why something was rejected is useful on a later date to know why but perhaps the issue of too many issues with the label is solved by a query for open rfc-tracking issues ? Ramana -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
