On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 02:04:51AM -0400, Bennett Todd wrote:
> 2000-09-18-01:35:42 Adam Turoff:
> > Background: RFCs should be in development until frozen or retired.
>
> An interesting puzzle. As the author of RFC 70, I've felt like I
> should make some updates, but they've been utterly trivial, mostly
> just citing other relevent RFCs, or adding a smigeon of detail
> thanks to tchrist's list of non-wrappable builtins.
Thanks, Bennett. I have my answer.
>From here on out, Frozen RFCs shall remain Frozen. Should the maintainer
wish to clarify them after they have been frozen, the version number
will increment by some fractional value (.01?), and a
"Clarified: DD MMM YYYY" header will be added to the metadata.
Objections?
I think it's time to encourage RFCs to be frozen. Hopefully this will help.
Z.
