On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Gaelan Steele <g...@canishe.com> wrote: > How attached is everyone to the current rule numbering scheme? I’ve started > applying proposals on git branches as they are distributed (so I can just > merge them when resolution rolls around), but I realized that this system > will not work if I have to assign sequential ID numbers, as I will not know > which proposals will succeed at the time of distribution. Would people mind > having holes in the rule numbers due to failed proposals?
Personally, very attached. I like having the numbers match up with every rule ever in existence (minus the earliest numbers, which are a know constant). Such a change would be effectively irreversible, and I don't like the break with tradition. -Aris
