On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 19:44, Jakub Zelenka <[email protected]> wrote: > I have to say that the RFC wasn't really well done as the implementation > followed which caused this omission. We should really look properly to the > implementation when creating RFC so it's more detailed and doesn't cause > omission like this. >
There's a bit of a Catch-22 there: voters want to know all the edge-cases before they approve an RFC; but developers want to know the RFC will be approved before they spend hours refining a patch. In some ways, it would be good to have two votes: one on the principle, and one on the detailed implementation; but that could make the process feel quite long and bureaucratic. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]
