Summary and call for discussion on text proposal

Tyson Whitehead twhitehead at
Sun Nov 7 22:48:55 EST 2010

On November 7, 2010 12:54:38 Gregory Collins wrote:
> Another point I would like to make is that unless I'm mistaken, even
> if text is accepted into the platform, that doesn't mean that
> maintainership of the library is assigned to libraries at it
> stays with Bryan. Given that he's repeatedly stated that the API is
> the way that it is because that's the way he *wants* it to be, and he
> has a plausible rationale for this, this entire discussion is MOOT and
> we should immediately stop wasting time and move to a vote on
> accepting text as-is.


As Greg pointed out, it really sounds like Bryan likes his names and is not 
offering to create/maintain an alternatively named version, so the outcome of 
this name discussion is not prerequisite for voting on accepting his package.

Not saying that this whole discussion about the pro's and con's of various 
naming schemes is not potentially valuable, just that it doesn't require an 
resolution to get on with voting on the proposed Data.Text addition.

Further, even if he was offering to change the names, it seems that the 
community is about evenly split, and, in that case, it seems only fair to go 
with the author's preference out of respect to the fact that he did the work.

Cheers!  -Tyson

PS:  Am I even suppose to be voting?  The more people that get to vote, the 
more we can be assured to never get better than average (yay committees).  I 
believe one of Linux's strong advantages is having Linus helps avoid this.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url :

More information about the Libraries mailing list