DIP 1017--Add Bottom Type--Final Review

[Mike Parker]

On Wednesday, 16 January 2019 at 11:40:36 UTC, Olivier FAURE 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 16 January 2019 at 10:25:21 UTC, Walter Bright 
> wrote:

>
> I mean, this is clearly the biggest point of contention. If the 
> DIP is forwarded and implemented without addressing it (like it 
> has been so far), then it's basically saying that the DIP 
> process is a formality and the gathered feedback doesn't matter.

I guess I need to edit the procedure document to clarify this. 
The DIP process is not just a formality and is working as 
intended.

The purpose of the review process is to help get the DIP in shape 
for the formal assessment by Walter and Andrei, to help ensure it 
is as thorough as possible. It is no way intended to be a 
referendum on whether a DIP should be implemented. In the formal 
assessment, Walter and Andrei will take any unaddressed feedback 
and objections into account, but the final decision rests with 
them.

Of course, in this case, it's a bit different since Walter is the 
DIP author. Your feedback is going directly to him. If you happen 
to persuade him to come around to your point of view, 
congratulations. But again, please don't view this referendum.