At 01:53 PM 8/3/00 -0400, Michael Mathews wrote:
>Steve Simmons explained
> > >
> > > IMHO someone should write an RFC on why perl6 should NOT have
> > > comments. The RFC editor doesn't have time to follow these zillions
> > > of discussions and write documents based on them.
> >
> > Ooog, horrible phrasing on my part. That should read ``the editor
> > of the RFC which is rejected.'' Sorry....
>
>This brings up a very important question (especially since you used my RFC
>as an example), which is: how shall we know when a particular RFC is
>rejected? My understanding was we should generate RFC's. I don't know if (or
>particularly how) we should be rejecting them before they are fully
>released.
I'd expect either the chair of the WG, or the person responsible for the
broader area the WG lives in, will be ultimately responsible for saying No
definitively.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
