From: Robert Dober Date: 2007-08-09T00:24:33+09:00 Subject: Re: #send in 1.9 On 8/8/07, Trans wrote: > > > On Aug 8, 3:59 am, dbl...@rubypal.com wrote: > > Hi -- > > > > > > > > On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Gregory Brown wrote: > > > On 8/7/07, Trans wrote: > > > > >> On Aug 7, 11:14 am, "Gregory Brown" wrote: > > >>> On 8/7/07, Trans wrote: > > > > >>>>> Then write an RCR and see how it does. I personally prefer send / > > >>>>> send! but am fine with send / funcall() > > > > >>>> See how it does? You're clearly unaware of the current RCR state of > > >>>> affairs. > > > > >>> Please elaborate. I don't see an RCR open for this, or rejected, for > > >>> that matter.http://rcrchive.net/ > > > > >> The RCR system is in a rather anemic state. Honestly, it's not worth > > >> the effort. It's better just to bring it up here and hope some of the > > >> popular stances filter up. > > > > > Yeah, you're right. But I think that might be partially our fault for > > > never bringing things beyond RubyTalk :) > > > > As far as I know, all the RCR process needs is people to submit RCRs. > > If anyone knows of anything technically wrong with the site, please > > let me know. > > > > I think people were unhappy about Matz's decision to start from > > scratch a little while back, but the process only exists in the first > > place as a mechanism for Matz to get information and discuss ideas, so > > it's really up to him if he wants people to resubmit. > > I think that's what you technical adepts have never grasped. The > problem isn't technical, it's haptic. > > But we've been threw this -- since the 2nd overhaul of the RCR > processes, let alone the third. For whatever reason, my critiques > clearly arn't worth the electrons they're transmitted-by. Do not say that, they are, but it is a reasonable approach to give in into the majority and not waste resources on an RCR that will fail. That said I feel that these discussions are also a kind of an informal CR process because Matz reads this, and how can he not be influenced by our infinite wisdom ;) Robert -- [...] as simple as possible, but no simpler. -- Attributed to Albert Einstein