DIP 1038--"@mustUse" (formerly "@noDiscard")--Accepted

[Dukc]

On Wednesday, 2 February 2022 at 22:58:39 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> No, that wasn’t the reason for the delay. Delays in the DIP 
> process always come down to someone waiting for a response from 
> someone else. Everyone involved has multiple priorities, so 
> when the next move comes down to any one person, it will happen 
> when that person is ready to make it happen.
>
> In this case, Walter took much longer than usual to get to his 
> initial review. I’ve set a 30-day window for this, but this 
> time he went over. The email discussions with Paul happened 
> over a relatively short period. Then there was a long delay 
> while we waited for Paul to get the changes made. I was busy 
> enough that I put all DIPs out of mind for a while, so I wasn’t 
> pinging him asking for an update.

An honest explaination.

>
> And this is not a fault with Paul. This happens with nearly 
> every DIP. All of the DIPs that have begun the process and are 
> currently in the queue  are stalled waiting for the authors to 
> tell me they’re ready to move to the next round. I ping them 
> periodically, and eventually they’ll be ready.

Not Pauls fault nor yours. Were all more or less busy and/or lazy.

>
> In any case, if there’s no news on a DIP, it’s almost always 
> because someone is waiting on someone else. If I’m not the 
> reason someone is waiting, then the only update I would ever be 
> able to give is “we’re waiting”.

Which would tell that it's not forgotten. You're technically 
right, what would we do with the information that a DIP is not 
(or is) forgotten? Perhaps ping sometimes ourselves but that's it.

But I think it still might have a bit morale value to do that 
"we're waiting" update if a formal assesment misses that 30-day 
window you mentioned, for instance. May be just my taste, though.