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?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to