@safe/DIP1028 explained in meme form

[Johannes Loher]

Am 28.05.20 um 19:52 schrieb Mike Parker:
> On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 17:46:13 UTC, Johannes Loher wrote:
> 
>> So the fact that the decision is made by Walter and Atila only is not
>> part of the process? If that’s the point of view, ok, the process does
>> not need any change. But at least parts of the community request a
>> change regarding this fact (I am not saying that this request is right
>> or wrong, I am just stating that it exists).
> 
> From the README in the DIP repository:
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs
> 
> "Each DIP is steered through a process of public review by the DIP
> manager. Each stage of the process is intended to prepare the DIP for
> its ultimate evaluation by the language maintainers (Walter Bright and
> Átila Neves)."
> 
> This is how I've always defined the "process". Once it's in the
> maintainers' hands, the "process" is finished and the decision making
> gets underway. So yes, I want to make clear when people claim "the DIP
> process is broken" that no, it is not as far as I can see.
> 
> 
> 
> 

>From the document
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/docs/process-reviews.md (which
the README.md links to as "The DIP Review Process"):

"There are four review stages, three of which are public and open to all
participants."

Then it lists:
- "Draft Review"
- "Community Review"
- "Final Review"
- "Formal Assessment"

To me this looks like "Formal Assessment" is part of the process.

All of this doesn't really matter though. It's just words / names. What
(some) people want is to change how / by whom the decision is made when
the DIP author is one of the 2 language maintainers. If that is not
formally part of the DIP process, fine, just change whatever process it
is part of (if we actually come to the conclusion that that's the right
thing to do).