Hi --

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Jim Weirich wrote:

> On Sunday 07 November 2004 09:08 am, David A. Black wrote:
> > I've been a member of the Ruby community for four years (minus roughly
> > 13 hours; my first post to ruby-talk was November 7, 2000, at 21:52
> > EST :-) 
> 
> Wow, how time flies!
> 
> > and one thing I'm not sure of is..... 
> >
> > To what extent should RCR discussion be here, and to what extent
> > should it be on the message/comment space on RCRchive?
> 
> If you have a glimmer of an RCR, and have done your research (at least googled 
> the topic on the mail list), the the mailing list is a good place to solicite 
> feedback.  Hopefully the research step will get you beyond the topics that 
> have been hashed out over and over (and over and over and ... well, you get 
> the idea).

I would also emphasize the importance of reading the rejected RCRs on
RCRchive, along with the list archives.  

> You can read: http://onestepback.org/index.cgi/Tech/Ruby/WritingRcrs.rdoc for 
> a longer rant on this topic.

I've read it -- actually it's been linked in to RCRchive as required
reading from the beginning :-)  

It just seems there are different scenarios in practice: submitting at
RCRchive first, then discussing here (which the scenario Matz was
endorsing this morning), discussing first and then submitting (which
happens a lot, even unendorsed :-), submitting and using the comment
space on RCRchive, etc.  I guess it's partly that discussion in any
forum sometimes happens to move toward discussion of possible language
changes, so in that sense pre-RCR discussion happens spontaneously.
(And it may not matter too much, as long as the basic tenets of
non-rehashing and non-resubmission of rejected ideas are followed.)


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack / wobblini.net