Formal Review Process

[Jesse Phillips]

On Tuesday, 11 June 2013 at 00:47:56 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I thought that it was clear that anything being submitted for 
> review for inclusion in Phobos actually had to be in a state 
> where a pull request for Phobos could be created for it.

There was no defining conclusion that I recall. There certainly 
were such opinions expressed, but as we don't have any review 
process for processes I don't see how a claim to clarity can 
exist for such matters.

I have provided my reason, the community is not providing the 
help contributers need during RFC.

> We certainly can't possibly vote it in if it's
> not in such a state, because we wouldn't even know what it 
> would look like when it was merged in.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Sure you can, if the modifications are simple to understand then 
it is clear what it will be like in the long run. For those who 
feel the unknowns are too great, "No" is an appropriate vote. On 
the more important side, during review many times the issues are 
resolved prior to voting.

That said, we do need to figure out how to guide contributers 
when they hit known/unknown show stoppers. I've been lucky so far 
in working with libraries built specifically for Phobos with good 
quality, I've intended to take the things I've learned and put 
them into the wiki; which I shall state so I'll actually take 
responsibility to do so.

Thank you Jonathan, I will continue to think about how I can 
better help a contributer and suggestions are welcome.