On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Nathan Larson nathanlarson3141@gmail.comwrote:
(snip) I actually like the formalism a bit - since it at least makes sure that they don't rot. BDFLs are good.
Does it keep them from rotting? It looks like of the 60 RFCs in draft or in discussion, 24 were last updated before 2013.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Leucosticte/RFCs_sorted_by_%22updated%22...
Weren't most of the RFCs you're talking about started before the new process was implemented? There's a lot of cleanup work to be done, and so far it seems like decent progress has been made. I agree we could be more aggressive about closing RFCs that are long stale, but it's hard to fault an architectural process that replaces what amounted to a vacuum. It's not like RFCs were all tidy and making progress before any new process was announced.
Steven