Re: State of PDD 0

At 04:01 PM 2/20/2001 -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote:
>Dan Sugalski writes:
> > I've been thinking since I sent my last mail on this that we might 
> actually
> > want to leave the two (PDD & RFC) separate. Keep on with the RFCs for
> > 'external' things, and PDD for the actual internals implementation of 
> things.
>
>Ultimately, I think we're going to need at least three different
>types of documentation:
>
>  * internals design documents (PDDs)
>  * language design documents (PLDs?)
>  * change requests, once we've got something to change (PCRs)

That works. I rather like it, and I expect once we get a working perl 6, we 
probably won't need to freeze things either--worst case we mark a proposed 
document irrelevant or something of the sort.

					Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[email protected]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk