On Sat, 10 Jun 2023 at 09:40, Helmut Grohne <hel...@subdivi.de> wrote: > My takeaway here is that while I see the protective diversion as the > "obviously superior solution", this clearly is not consensus at this > time. It also means that when rewriting DEP 17, I need to spend quite a > bit of text on rationale. Thank you.
I would caution to avoid interpreting clarifying questions being asked as dissent. It's good to ask questions and clarify details about corner cases, but I wouldn't automatically write them down as disagreement. At least that's my reading of recent parts of this thread. Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
