On Thu, 27 Apr 2017, Alex Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2017-04-26 at 22:56 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > Reenact rule 2166, Assets (Power = 2), with the following text: > > > > Is there a meaningful distinction between re-enacting a rule and > > creating a rule? > > Rule history is something that legally has to be tracked, in the FLR. > If you re-enact a rule, the history (and ID number) of the old rule > stays around. Enacting a new rule would make it appear to have been > created from scratch. > > (We only invented this mechanism very recently. I'm not sure if it's > been used yet. At least, helping to prevent rule number inflation seems > like a good thing.)
It has never been used. (at least, not in an *adopted* proposal). If it's used, in order to make the history complete I'd need to track down when it was repealed (that's something that can't be derived from old FLRs, it requires some proposal searching). Not that it's a huge deal. I personally don't think it's *that* value added to conserve ID numbers; they're free. I do somewhat like the idea of historical continuity if a "new" idea is substantially identical to an old one.
