The DIP Process

[Nicholas Wilson]

On Thursday, 28 February 2019 at 23:17:49 UTC, Olivier FAURE 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 22:56:40 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
> Wakeling wrote:
>> Which is: have you considered the possibility that Walter and 
>> Andrei are the only people who really know what they're 
>> talking about, and everyone else is a [expletive] idiot? :-)
>
> Without being that extreme, yeah, the community has a tendency 
> to immediately assume "W&A are missing something obvious" 
> instead of "W&A are seeing something I'm not".

The fact the they caught that the DIP doesn't specify how it is 
supposed to behave under exception is a good thing...

> The fact that W&A seem somewhat bad at communicating their 
> viewpoint (and understanding other people's viewpoint) doesn't 
> help.

... therein lies the problem. The good thing is we can fix this 
by fixing the DIP process to prescribe what should and shouldn't 
happen when DIP breaking behaviour is discovered post final. 
Communication with the DIP author is a good start.