Re: RFC Suggest: Use of L<> to link RFCs; "CONFLICTS WITH", "REQUIRES", "STATUS" sections

At 05:27 PM 8/18/00 -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
>BI'm not sure how realistic freezing an RFC is, though.  I want it
>because I suspect long-running discussions of providing diminishing
>returns, but I know enough about myself to also wonder whether this
>isn't a personal quirk.  Input requested.

I agree totally.  Sooner or later (not much later IMHO), the point is 
reached where people are (a) repeating arguments they've made several times 
before, to try and make their view win, and (b) tossing out half-baked and 
half-hearted ideas just for something to do.  IMHO the -language group is 
going to get there within 2 weeks.  Once you see the RFC "Perl should be 
more like COBOL" you'll know you should have pulled the plug earlier :-)

Any process without a deadline will take forever.

--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies