Why isn't dip1000 fully implemented yet?

[Daniel N]

On Thursday, 22 November 2018 at 12:32:30 UTC, Nicholas Wilson 
wrote:
>
> The second issue at play is that there have been a number of 
> undocumented changes to dip1000, and those changes were pulled 
> on the understanding that it will be documented. That hasn't 
> happened yet, and won't until Walter approves the documentation 
> (it won't merge due to some weird LaTeX errors in the doc 
> builder but that is beside the point).

Well, my proposal is that we instead are strict about 
documentation being hard release blockers for the next release.

That approach would facilitate core-devs to work efficiently in 
between releases, not wasting resources on rebasing multiple 
times for many months or years(looking at you multiple this).

It's much easier to rebase old docs, than to rebase old code 
commits when internal API:s were refactored.