DIP 1021--Argument Ownership and Function Calls--Formal Assessment

[Mike Parker]

On Wednesday, 23 October 2019 at 04:20:19 UTC, Exil wrote:

> Should create a DIPW process then, duck the foundation and any 
> formalities. Which stands for DIPWalter, which simply consists 
> of a single step where a single topic tries to convince Walter 
> it's a bad idea. Why have two community reviews? Those are made 
> with the assumption that the DIP will actually change between 
> the reviews. What's the point of a "formal review" when there's 
> just Walter talking to himself (rip Andrei). Why waste 
> everyone's time on formalities when they obviously are 
> irrelevant?

The formal assessment isn't Walter by himself. Atila took 
Andrei's place in that role. There is no automatic approval. Had 
Atila objected to the DIP, Walter would have had to either 
convince him to come around to his point of view or revise the 
DIP to meet Atila's concerns.