DIP 1021--Argument Ownership and Function Calls--Formal Assessment

Exil Exil at gmall.com
Wed Oct 23 15:37:22 UTC 2019

On Wednesday, 23 October 2019 at 04:53:55 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Wednesday, 23 October 2019 at 04:20:19 UTC, Exil wrote:
>> it's a bad idea. Why have two community reviews? Those are 
>> made with the assumption that the DIP will actually change 
>> between the reviews.
> No, that's not the assumption. You're conflating Community 
> Review with Final Review. There can be multiple rounds of the 
> former as required and only one of the latter. In a perfect 
> scenario, no revisions are required between CR and FR. The 
> purpose of the Final Review is to provide one final opportunity 
> to catch any major issues that might have been missed during 
> the CR round(s) and to allow anyone who missed the CR round(s) 
> a final opportunity to have their say. Revisions are expected 
> after a CR round, but not after the FR. As the documentation 
> explains:
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/docs/process-reviews.md

Why even have a final review then? Shouldn't the community review 
only end if there are no more changes to be made? If changes are 
made after the Final Review, then those changes won't get to be 
reviewed. If the author doesn't take any criticism of their work 
and decides their DIP is a shiny pile of words that doesn't needy 
any more polishing, why have the community review the same thing 
again? If that is how it is intended to be then it is a flawed 
system at that.

More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce mailing list