> > Status: Frozen
>
> I'm sorry, I was gonna bite my lip, but I've gotta say: Freezing RFC's
> like this when the following is true:
>
> > A lot of good, heated discussion was generated on the mailing lists. The
> > majority seems against using XML-DTD documentation, but granted there are
> > deficiencies in POD.
>
> Is absolutely, 100% against the entire idea of the RFC process. They're
> "Requests for Comments". The comments received were overwhelmingly "This
> is a Bad Idea".
Exactly.
One major gripe I had and still have with the RFC process is that many
authors equated RFCs as their very own pet projects which shall not be
criticized in any form, state, or manner. Pointed out flaws and
problems were not recorded down in the RFCs. I admit that my idea of
healthy RFC process may not be shared by everyone and that we
certainly did not specify how RFCs should be maintained.
It's possible to overboard in the other direction, too: some RFCs
tried perhaps too hard to embrace every little idea or comment thrown at
their direction, resulting in bulky monstrosities, where featuritis
is not only creeping but leaping.
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
