On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Mark Engelberg <mark.engelb...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Jason Wolfe <jawo...@berkeley.edu> > wrote: > > > > OK, if these are not wanted in core right now, will anyone sign off > > for adding them to clojure.contrib? > > > > Well, *I* want these changes you've proposed in the core, but of > course, I'm not in charge. I guess the real question is, what is the > process to ensure that Rich sees and considers a potential core > improvement like this? I think the main mechanism for this is to post > it as an "issue" on google code, but I'm not certain whether you're > supposed to post an issue unless he's seen the newsgroup thread and > says, "Yes, that sounds good, please post it as an issue." But if he > misses the thread for some reason, that will never happen. So it's a > bit of a catch-22. Anyway, maybe someone can clarify the procedure. > In a previous thread Rich suggested that additions to clojure-contrib be discussed here and lacking any objections they should be posted as issues with attached patches on the clojure-contrib project. From what I've seen in the past clojure-contrib is the place for functions like the fast set operations discussed here. This gives people a chance to use them and identify any problems, etc before being considered for a move into clojure core. -- Cosmin Stejerean http://offbytwo.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
