The DIP Process

[Nicholas Wilson]

On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 11:28:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> I'm still open to revising the process.

Good I'm sure that people will have plenty of things to say at 
Dconf/the foundation meeting at dconf

> * I will no longer simply *ask* DIP authors to respond to 
> feedback in the review threads, I will *require* it.

Good, that strikes one item off the dconf foundation meeting 
agenda.

> Note that this does not mean I will require the author to make 
> any revisions, nor does it mean that I will pull the DIP if the 
> opinions of the proposal are overwhelmingly negative. Again, 
> that's not my role. It means the author must leave responses to 
> feedback in the thread agreeing or disagreeing with each unique 
> criticism and the decision to proceed lies entirely with the 
> author. That includes Walter and Andrei if either of them are 
> the sole author of a DIP. Previously, I didn't even ask them to 
> respond as they are the ones rendering the final verdict 
> anyway, but I now recognize it's important that all DIP authors 
> express their opinions of the feedback they receive.

Good.

> * I will do my best to provide more detailed summaries of the 
> Formal Assessment. Walter and Andrei tend to deliver their 
> opinions of a proposal informally, either tersely or over a 
> long email discussion. I do my best to summarize their thoughts 
> at the bottom of the DIP. After the response to the review of 
> DIP 1016, I discussed with Walter and Andrei how I can provide 
> more detailed summaries and we will work to make that happen 
> going forward.

Thanks!