Formal Review Process

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2013-06-11 04:46, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

> "Just imagine what the API would be like if it was in Phobos" isn't good
> enough.  Especially for this library, it looks like there are quite a
> few modules.  Where do those go?  What changes are made?  Standing out
> right away is
>
> We need an API document of what it would be in Phobos, and how the API
> works.
>
> I would recommend suspending this review, putting together a strawman
> API of how you think it will look under phobos, post that as an RFC, and
> then judge whether it's worth porting from that response.  If there's
> only a subset of the API we should be looking at that, show me that subset.
>
> We simply cannot have a formal review on software that isn't ready for
> inclusion - by definition we would have to have another review later
> when it's ready for inclusion.

The API is ready, see my post to Jonathan.

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/adyanbsdsxsfdpvoozne@forum.dlang.org?page=2#post-kp6gi4:242tvc:241:40digitalmars.com

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg