Re: Initial Structure
[email protected] (Dan Sugalski)
| Newsgroups | perl.bootstrap |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
At 08:12 AM 7/27/00 +0900, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 06:37:54PM -0400, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote: > > I don't think these final two items belong in the RFC; in the best of > > all possible worlds, this wouldn't even be discussed at the time an RFC > > is created. I feel that an RFC should list issues to be considered in > > implementing a solution, such as scalability and security. > > > > I also think that a justification for the proposed change should be > > part of the RFC. > >Okay. I'm confused. > >Are RFCs issued by a group leader, or anyone who feels like? Are RFCs the >final considered opinion on an issue, or are they the initial thoughts? >How, when, and by whom are they updated? RFCs can be issued by anyone who feels like it. It's my understanding that an RFC must be championed by someone to go anywhere, and just because an RFC is issued (and championed) it doesn't mean it'll make it in. Like the IETF RFCs, some are preliminary, some are informational, and some are experimental. Dan --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- Dan Sugalski even samurai [email protected] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk