On 11/17/2016 03:20 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 11/17/2016 06:37 AM, Dicebot wrote: >> Disposition: REJECT. A proposal for a similar or identical feature would >> need to be include qualitatively new motivation/evidence of usefulness. >> >> Please follow the link for the full review text / rationale: >> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1002.md#review > > Thanks Dicebot for carrying the process through. I think we need a > versioning mechanism for DIPs. In the general case we'll have the > disposition "Changes Requested", which will prompt the DIP authors to > revise the DIP. The DIP will keep its number but will receive a new > revision (either a newer commit or, more likely, an entirely new > document). That revision will receive a new, separate review etc. -- Andrei
Don't think I understand the process you have in mind. Right now there are two possible cases for updating DIP: 1) It was rejected and someone wants to submit a drastically different proposal on same topic. This has to come as brand new DIP document with own number. 2) It is a regular update. In that case revision number is simply git history. For example DIP1002 is currently at revision 7 (git log --pretty=oneline DIPs/DIP1002.md | wc -l). Same goes for update of reviews - everything is tracked in git history. At any given point of time you simply throw away everything old and keep only most recent versions. Am I missing something in your requirements?
Description: OpenPGP digital signature