On 9/24/21 1:08 AM, Jon Skeet wrote:
> we don't genuinely know the impact of a change of *this* scale. I
> would suggest that we've done "this sort of thing" on a smaller scale.
OK, how about if I scale back the current round of link-merging, so that
it's on the scale of what we've done in previous releases? I would not
at all be happy with such an approach since it would delay the release
of an equitable solution, but if this approach will help reach consensus
I can prepare a patch along those lines. The idea would be to finish the
job in the next few releases.
I'd need to see exactly what's proposed, as would others, but I'm happy to look.
However, I wouldn't expect us to be able to get opinions on that immediately - whereas we really need a change for Samoa ASAP.
So I personally (I'm not going to attempt to speak for anyone else) would be happy with a plan of:
- Release 2021b as "2021a + Samoa" today
- Create the patch with the limited changes and submit it for community approval, with an eye to releasing that (and making progress in your view) in a few weeks, whether or not there are any other data changes to be released.
What we're still missing is any way of taking the community view, admittedly. I'd suggest that a GitHub PR with the change could allow "voting" via reactions (as well as comments on the details, of course). I suspect that's clearer than just mailing list discussions - although of course it requires folks to have GitHub accounts.
Jon