On Jan 20, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Jason Wolfe wrote:
> >> On Jan 20, 4:15 pm, Chouser <chou...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi >>> <squee...@mac.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> I recommend that proposed changes for clojure-contrib be tracked as >>>> clojure-contrib issues. >>> >>> I agree. >>> >>>> My understanding of the issue policy for Clojure is that Rich >>>> would still >>>> like to approve them either here or on #clojure (irc) before >>>> they're >>>> entered. (ref: his recent posting on the topic.) I'm not aware of >>>> whether or >>>> not he has approved entering issue(s) in this case. >>> >>> That's a very interesting point. My impression has been that lack >>> of >>> objection from him here (or on IRC) is sufficient approval to post >>> something on the issues page. If he was completely opposed to these >>> proposals, he's had several days to make his opinion known. >>> >>> Of course that's no guarantee that the issue or any particular patch >>> will be approved, but it makes sure that issues and proposed patches >>> aren't lost in archives. >>> >>> Hopefully Rich will clarify his wishes on this. >>> >> >> Yes, proposed changes to clojure-contrib should be discussed here >> first. If a member of clojure-contrib approves, they should become >> clojure-contrib issues, and any related patches attached to such >> issues. clojure-contrib members can incorporate (or not!) those >> patches (when coming from registered contributors), check them in, >> and >> resolve the issues. > > Thanks Rich. But, I think this answers only one of the questions at > hand (about clojure.contrib issues). The other question (to which I > think Chouser was referring above) was about issues for Clojure core, > and whether or not an explicit sign-off from you was desired before > they are posted there. This came up in this thread since after > discussing with Chouser, several of my utilities seemed better-suited > as changes/additions to Clojure core rather than contrib. > I didn't find any of them compelling enough for core just yet. Putting them in contrib first lets people try them out and refine them, point out redundancies and conflicts etc. As a general rule I haven't pulled many simple combining functions from contrib, as they just pollute the namespaces. Plus, I don't think things are as cut and dried as you make out, for instance I'd expect map-when and iterate-while to take predicates. Rich --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
