On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 11:22 AM Eliot Lear <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Eric, > On 07.10.2025 20:09, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > I'm struggling to understand the concern here, given that the > current approved email flow involves the editors sending > text in OLD/NEW format, which is essentially what GitHub > suggestions are. There's no ambiguity about the desired > new state and if they are committed it's trivial to see what > changed. > > > That's not ENTIRELY the case (so to speak). Sometimes there are some > global changes with cassification, spelling and such, requiring rebasing, > etc. > Are you talking about cases in which the RPC made some change that the author wants reversed globally? Yes, I agree that in that case you wouldn't use suggestions. But you also wouldn't attach a PR update, you would tell the RPC in text to reverse it.
I don't see why this would require a rebase, though. > I'm *fully confident* the RPC is up to managing that, btw, in terms of > finding the best work flow (like maybe ordering PR processing). And I > don't want to make a mountain out of a mole hill, but there will probably > be times when ```suggestion doesn't QUITE cut it, and we shouldn't rely on > it as the only means for changes. > Nor am I suggesting that. -Ekr Regards, > > Eliot > > >
_______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
