[swift-evolution] Swift phases and mis-timed proposals

[Xiaodi Wu]

I think there is merit to the current system, although it can be annoying.

I’m sure we can all agree that a properly submitted and approved proposal
should have solicited the fullest possible feedback at each stage,
including the initial pitch stages. Based on the experience of Swift 3
evolution, however, it’s clear that there is limited bandwidth for
participants to engage fully with all possible topics.

The innovation of defining priorities for each phase has really helped to
bring about a more manageable process for everyone, I think. If a proposal
is not in scope, then participants don’t (and shouldn’t) feel like they
miss an opportunity to help shape a feature by sitting out the
conversation. Therefore, by definition, any such out-of-scope conversations
will not get the fullest possible feedback from community when it is
pitched, and it should go through the pitch process again from the
beginning if the aim is to progress to the next stage.

Otherwise, you’re basically exempting the initial pitch stage from the
parameters of what’s out of scope, defeating the purpose of that innovation.

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 15:48 Daryle Walker via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> I’ve read about the Swift developers taking certain kinds of proposals
> during certain phases (Swift 3, Swift 4 stage 1, Swift 4 stage 2, etc.). So
> if someone writes a proposal that isn’t of the type of the current phase,
> it’s auto-rejected. Is it possible to set some kind of proposal queue so
> their authors don’t have to guess when it’s the right time to resubmit?
>
> —
> Daryle Walker
> Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie
> darylew AT mac DOT com
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20170611/a9dcbb90/attachment.html>