std.log review extended until Feb 13

[David Nadlinger]

On Wednesday, 7 March 2012 at 21:51:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> Actually, I think that most proposals have been reviewed for 
> only two weeks
> before voting, but regardless, clearly std.log needs more 
> review.

I had the four week for std.csv in mind when I wrote that, but 
yeah, I think it was something between two and four weeks for all 
of the previous submissions.

We should also be careful not to spend too much time on 
bikeshedding, as there are other items waiting in the review 
queue as well, but I think at the current point, where several 
discussions are still going on, voting would make no sense. 
Hopefully, the situation will be clearer next week (even if the 
outcome of the vote might only be to reject/postpone inclusion of 
the library because of no consensus).

David