From: Alexandre F. <ale...@gm...> - 2009-10-09 07:42:28
|
On 10/9/09, Kevin Kenny <kev...@gm...> wrote: > > On the other hand, Joe's and Daniel's criticisms suggest that > the TIP isn't fully baked. Yes, I admit the CFV was possibly a bit hurried. It is my fault, I asked Jeff and Andreas for sponsorship, and they were very fast to help me finish it and test it. When they proposed the CFV I didn't react, thinking we had no need for an extra discussion step, since (1) the ::tcl namespace issue had been raised before and (2) I was under the impression that 8.6 was imminent. Now I can see I was wrong, so my proposition is to SEND IT BACK as Daniel says, and enter the discussion step instead. See my answer to Daniel to proceed on the API definition. -Alex |