DIP 1021--Argument Ownership and Function Calls--Final Review

[Mike Parker]

On Monday, 16 September 2019 at 16:51:41 UTC, Olivier FAURE wrote:

> I don't understand the point of this review thread.
>
> I know I've been hostile to this proposal, but beyond the 
> object-level problems (which I won't repeat), there seems to be 
> a problem of process here.
>
> Reviewers have given feedback. Walter has, as you yourself 
> noted, declared that feedback was invalid and already covered 
> by the existing proposal; as such, the proposal is being posted 
> again with no content change.
>
> Like, I get that it isn't your job to agree or disagree with 
> Walter on an object level; but on a process level, something 
> clearly isn't working, and it feels like you should intervene. 
> Either by putting your foot down and asking Walter make changes 
> (like, any changes at all); by having some sort of mediator 
> role between Walter and reviewers, maybe by organizing a chat 
> or something; or by fast-tracking the proposal all the way and 
> skipping the final review.
>
> Because right now, I have to agree with Exil from last thread: 
> I'm saying this with all the respect I have for you, but this 
> is a charade. You're asking for feedback that we know for a 
> fact Walter will ignore, because he has ignored all feedback 
> given so far.

It is not my place, with any DIP, to "put my foot down". The 
process does not require any revisions between review rounds. It 
is 100% up to the author to accept or reject feedback. Most of 
the DIPs that have gone through the process change very little 
between Community Review and Final Review.

The purpose of the Final Review is to provide one final chance 
for any major points of feedback that might have been missed in 
the previous review rounds. Again, it is up to the author, not 
me, to determine if the feedback is valid and whether or not to 
proceed.

I'm a shepherd, not a gatekeeper.

If you'd like to have a discussion about the DIP process, please 
start a new thread. This one is not the place for it.

Thanks!