Re: [STANDARDS] Discussion/change protocol?

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Stas Malyshev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> After the spec draft was published, there has been a lively stream of
> commits, mostly of technical nature. However, the question is, when we
> get to things of more fundamental nature, what would be the protocol to
> decide this? I'd like to avoid endless bickering and bikeshedding if
> possible, but OTOH just committing whatever anybody wants doesn't go
> well for spec either. So how we decide which changes are good and which
> are not?

I took the liberty to merge 15+ PRs yesterday, all of obvious nature
(typo/syntax/grammar).

Isn't the current goal to provide a language specification that
describes how things are _today_ - and then moving on, I imagine any
(language level) RFC would be modifications to the language spec?

As for your concrete comments on the PRs; We may need a "nomenclatures
document" (more then just the "Terms and Definitions" section)?

Lets hope we don't need standards committees and excessive levels of
politics to organize the document.

-Hannes