On 8/30/24 22:36, Dukc wrote:
> He said that going forward, accepting a bad DIP would be less
consequential than it had been in the past once we had editions. In the
worst case, we'd have one thing more to maintain in an intermediate
edition before it was fixed. Maybe that was a calculation we could take
into consideration. Átila said that was a good point.
You should be at least as worried about the damage to contributor morale
on a bad decision as about the damage to the language. Editions do good
job limiting the latter but not the former. If you accept that you can
see why this attitude is unnerving.
Rejecting a DIP can be one of those bad decisions.
Anyway, obviously I prefer good decisions over bad decisions,
