As a non-member potential proposer, I'd strongly second this motion. Based on the following:
*Ideas for evolving the ECMAScript language are accepted in any form. Any discussion, idea or proposal for a change or addition which has not been submitted as a formal proposal is considered to be a “strawman” (stage 0) and has no acceptance requirements. Such submissions must either come from members of TC39 or from non-members who have registered via Ecma International.* from https://tc39.github.io/process-document/, after registering, I submitted a pull request at https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/449, which was politely rejected by @michaelficarra with the note that I needed a champion and the process document was out of date. My proposal, called extended pick notation (see https://github.com/rtm/js-pick-notation) is, IMHO, well above average in terms of having a fleshed-out proposal and a POC implementation in sweet. Without rehashing the details and the motivation, it's a feature which quite a few people have requested in one form or another, has limited syntactic footprint, and has generated a fair amount of feedback on the ML. It would nice if I could find a champion but that hasn't happened yet. Bob On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 9:55 AM, G. Kay Lee < [email protected]> wrote: > But a lot of non-member contributions were denied of this basic > opportunity to "post a thread" - certainly, they can post here on the ML, > but the ML is hardly a suitable medium to collaborate and push things > forward. The [pipe operator proposal]( > https://github.com/mindeavor/es-pipeline-operator) has garnered a lot of > attentions and interests, with heated discussions happening here as well as > across other places, but eventually just died down when people found out > that they couldn't even get a simple yes-or-no-for-stage-0 from any TC39 > representative [after one month]( > https://esdiscuss.org/topic/the-pipeline-operator-making-multiple-function-calls-look-great) > of time. And remember that stage 0 simply means starting discussions in a > more formal physical setting. > > Why not just allow proposers to chime in remotely during a TC39 meeting > with their proposals? >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
