std.log review extended until Feb 13

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Wednesday, March 07, 2012 23:05:29 David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Wednesday, 7 March 2012 at 21:51:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
> 
> wrote:
> > Actually, I think that most proposals have been reviewed for
> > only two weeks
> > before voting, but regardless, clearly std.log needs more
> > review.
> 
> I had the four week for std.csv in mind when I wrote that, but
> yeah, I think it was something between two and four weeks for all
> of the previous submissions.
> 
> We should also be careful not to spend too much time on
> bikeshedding, as there are other items waiting in the review
> queue as well, but I think at the current point, where several
> discussions are still going on, voting would make no sense.
> Hopefully, the situation will be clearer next week (even if the
> outcome of the vote might only be to reject/postpone inclusion of
> the library because of no consensus).

If it needs to go on longer than that, then it's either going to need to be 
rejected or reworked and reviewed again later. But there's no question that we 
don't have a consensus right now.

- Jonathan M Davis