I am very disappointed in this outcome of the HACK proposal. I thought, it had a small change to be added to 1.7, but that it didn't even make it into HEAD really astonishes me.
The main problem here is that the cotes were too varied - some people demanded a project, some gave reasons but even if you change code, you need to resubmit it again. That is the (nasty) nature of hacks.
This is a reason why we want people to discuss most votes first.
If you add the changes, you can resubmit the hack, and people can bring out a vote on that hack proposal. Making changes mid-vote can get too confusing, and I cannot guarantee everyone will agree still agree.
I may have added to the confusion by adding the packaging vote, though I don't think that really would have changed the outcome.
The easiest is really to adapt and recast the vote, and hope the critics can agree with the changes, or to make it a small project, which allows you to change the code as you progress (depending on input).
Gomez
