All-
As Nat has mentioned on -meta, it's time to start wrapping things up. In
particular, I think the following "deadlines" should apply:
1. Any and all *new* RFC's should be submitted by Wednesday at the
absolute latest (preferably sooner).
2. All existing RFC's should have their final "developing" versions
posted by this Friday, Sep 22nd, at the latest.
3. All RFCs should be frozen by the following Wednesday, Sep 27th.
The hard deadline is Sep 30th for frozen RFCs.
I will make no efforts to enforce these "deadlines", however please
consider that the sooner your frozen RFC is done, the sooner Larry will
be able to evaluate it. He's making his decision in about 3 weeks, so
the sooner the better. I will make a final dredge through this weekend
and will post a list of those RFCs still in need of updating Monday (but
you probably know who you are).
When freezing your RFCs, please add a section up top called "NOTES ON
FREEZE", under the ABSTRACT section. In this section, please include a
brief little synopsis:
a) what the general consensus was
b) any specific highlights or issues to be resolved still
c) any dependencies on other RFC's
This section should be brief and honest. For an example, please see RFC
164.
The intent here is to clarify key points, and avoid giving Larry RFCs
that would have a top section that looked like this:
=head1 NOTES ON FREEZE
Everyone else hated this idea, but I really like it, so
screw everybody, I'm freezing it anyways.
If your idea was disliked overall, be honest with yourself and others.
I've retracted 3 of mine personally already because they ended up being
real stinkers, or superceded by better ideas. If you retract your idea,
an optional "NOTES ON RETRACTION" section would be nice, since it could
help ideas from being brought up again in the future.
For an example of this, please see RFC 175.
Final words: Let's try to avoid flooding the list with last-minute RFCs.
Let's try to get the main ones out there that could affect the
fundamental shape of the language. Other stuff can be added as we see
fit later in Perl 6.0.1, 6.0.2, etc.
And if you have a problem with an existing RFC, please don't submit a
counter-RFC as your first course of action. Please try first
contributing to existing discussions and reaching consensus, since that
has worked quite effectively so far.
Your sublist footstool,
Nate
