new DIP1: DIP Template

[Paul D. Anderson]

Leandro Lucarella Wrote:

> 
> Yes, that's important information too. I might add some of this
> suggestions to the template. Do you think any of this should be present in
> the metadata? I think maybe the target version of the language, but since
> D1 is not allowed to evolve, I think the target version of the language
> will always be the one in development, so I'm not sure about the utility
> of that (considering that the information on in what version the DIP was
> implemented will be present for Accepted DIPs).
> 

Yes, I think the target language version and/or component/library/tool/etc. should be in the metadata (as they are in Bugzilla), since there are many occasions where we're only interested in a subset of what's being discussed.

With respect to breaking changes in stable versions -- I know the party line is not to allow them, but their proposal and discussion is often fruitful. And I think they'll be proposed whether they're allowed or not!

> > The Java Community Process (which is very formal and glacially slow)
> > uses a question based format that may be helpful here too. (I mean the
> > list of questions -- not that we should use questions.)  One of their
> > questions is "Why isn't this need met by existing specifications?".
> > Proposers might consider this -- it could separate the bicycle shed
> > ideas from more fundamental ones.
> 
> I think that's what the Rationale is for.
> 

Yes, I agree. It's just a suggestion to get people to think about what they're proposing. New capabilities in the language are more important (to me) than doing old things in a new way. :-)

Paul