I'm +1 on the sentiment. My main concern is with the potential for effort
to be gated on documentation review. This essentially requires design
review for all new features before development begins. Great in theory, but
I worry in practice things may get held up while we try to work out details
tha
Slight change of position - i think the documentation with the pitch should
reflect the end state. In other words, it should be suitable for
committing on master when the feature is ready; and not be a pitch itself.
This is slightly different from the doc linked above.
-=Bill
On Mon, Oct 13, 201
Maxim's 'External Update Coordination' thread [1] sets a precedent for
pitching a feature via documentation before diving into code. I propose we
standardize on this practice for big and small features. This will take
some trial-and-error to get right, but i think for small changes requiring
docu
