Michael Mathews wrote: > how shall I, as an RFC > Maintainer determine what that status is? > > Personally I don't want anything to do with judging the "status" of this > RFC, beyond my one voice. I do accept responsibility for compiling some > organized record of the responses I've received, but who shall decide > (before Larry decides)? You have to determine the status, but that shouldn't be scary, considering these RFCs are ultimately just recommendations for Larry's consideration. Since the broad concensus seems to have been that inline comments might be very useful, and not breaking anything else, the status could be "Good". On this particular RFC, you probably want to summarize all the alternatives suggested, along with the pros and cons of each. You can ignore the ideas that no one seemed to like (if any). -- John Porter
- Recording what we decided *not* to do, and why Steve Simmons
- Re: Recording what we decided *not* to do, and wh... Nathan Torkington
- Re: Recording what we decided *not* to do, an... Steve Simmons
- Re: Recording what we decided *not* to do... Michael Mathews
- Re: Recording what we decided *not* t... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Recording what we decided *n... Michael Mathews
- Re: Recording what we decide... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Recording what we decide... John Porter
- Re: Recording what we de... Larry Wall
- Re: Recording what we de... Peter Scott
- Re: Recording what we de... Michael Mathews
- Re: Recording what we de... John Porter
- Re: Recording what we de... Johan Vromans
- Re: Recording what we de... Tom Christiansen
- Re: Recording what we de... John Porter
- Re: Recording what we de... Steve Simmons
- Re: Recording what we de... John Porter
- Re: Recording what we de... Tom Christiansen