On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 17:58:46 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 03/19/2011 04:25 PM, dsimcha wrote: >> On 3/19/2011 4:35 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >>> I know you'd have no problem finding the right voice in this >>> discussion if you only frame it in the right light. Again, people are >>> trying to help (however awkwardly) and in no way is that ridiculous. >> >> Fair enough. Now that I think of it most of my frustration is that >> these details are only getting looked at now, when I have a week (and >> an otherwise very busy week) to fix all this stuff, when this module >> has been officially in review for the past two weeks and unofficially >> for several months. I would be much more open to this process if the >> issues raised could be fixed at my leisure rather than on a hard and >> tight deadline. This is exacerbated by the fact that I have another >> important, unrelated deadline, also next Friday. >> >> At the same time, though, I'm afraid that if we didn't fix a vote date >> and put some urgency into things, the pace of the reviews would be >> glacial at best, like it was for the first two weeks of official review >> and the months of unofficial review. > > Exactly. I understand. Well here's a suggestion. How about we "git > stash" this review? I recall another submission was vying for the queue > so we can proceed with that while you have time to operate the changes > you want. If not, we can simply wait 2-3 weeks and then have you > resubmit for a shorter process (1-2 weeks) that would gather more > feedback (hopefully minor that time) and votes. > > Lars?
Sounds good. I'll make the announcement. -Lars