On 2/11/2018 8:59 PM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
Though I do realize that's not likely to happen. It's not as if I'm saying "hey, go do this". All I'm really saying is "I like this idea, I'm in favor of it, and it's worth being open to." Not much more than that.

> "That's a reasonable point and a would be a nice touch, and it doesn't impact > other things. Andrei and I, naturally, can't dedicate any of our resources to > it because we have more crutial priorities on our plates, but we wouldn't
> necessarily veto a quality implementation."

It has nothing to do with my or Andrei's time, nor anything to do with whether it is a quality implementation or not.

We should not be adding features just because we can. They need a compelling case. This one does not have one. If such a case does emerge in the future, we can look at it again.

I do not wish to tacitly greenlight projects that have little chance of being incorporated. It isn't right to waste peoples' time like that. I don't derive any pleasure from being Dr. No, but somebody has to do it, and it falls to me.

Reply via email to