Looking in only one place is better, and it's better for code linking as well so -1.
However more aggressive closing and a Github template that should basically tell: > ## RFCs (Request for Comments/Changes) > > We welcome Nim enhancement proposals, while there is no minimum please ensure > that the current context, how you see your proposal improves it and an > expected transition if it's not backward compatible are documented. Here are > some examples of RFCs 1, 2, and 3 that though different, illustrates what > kind of proposals we are looking for. We might close your proposal until > further rework, for that we're sorry, don't take it to heart we do welcome > contributions, as the language is growing we are learning as well on how to > manage our time. We might as well through an issue template as well > ## Issues > > We will not ask you to fill a dreaded form before reporting an issue. However > it is crucial that we get steps to reproduce your issue. The best would be a > minimal test that only uses Nim and the standard library. This way we can > integrate it to Nim test suite and ensures that no regressions occur in the > future.
