On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Alexander Bezzubov <b...@apache.org> wrote:
> Eric, > thank you for chimming in and I'm sorry for miss-information on 702! > > To be honest, I totally agree on your point on B. That would be the best of > all worlds, but given the time and input from other participants the > concensus over B seems to be hard to reach. I would love to contribute in > B, but if its not possible, C sounds like a way to go to me. > > Please correct me if I'm wrong, but at this poit one can see only one > strong -1 for going on with plan C. > > I want to ask Amos to give > - the concise gist of why he thinks plan C is not a good meritocratic > solution for everybody (without mentioning any other people, please) > - and what is the compromiss he suggests, given what the community have > spoken out > > -- > Alex Looks like R support is something the community really wants, and I am sure others are willing to help bring one or even both interpreters to a status where it conforms with the project quality standards (e.g. test coverage and CI Builds passing). What is the problem with merging this (or these) now, and not add to the build reactor, so that others can collaborate with PRs to make progress to the R interpreter ? -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
