P2138 Rules of Design <=> Wording engagement

[wg21bot]

P2138R0 Rules of Design<=>Wording engagement (Ville Voutilainen)

[wg21bot]

P2138R1 Rules of Design<=>Wording engagement (Ville Voutilainen)

[brycelelbach]

Informative only?

[wg21bot]

P2138R2 Rules of Design<=>Wording engagement (Ville Voutilainen)

[wg21bot]

P2138R3 Rules of Design <=> Specification engagement (Ville Voutilainen)

[wg21bot]

P2138R4 Rules of Design<=>Specification engagement (Ville Voutilainen)

[brycelelbach]

2021-06-14 Joint Library Evolution and Language Evolution Telecon

P2138R4: Rules of Design <=> Specification Engagement

2021-06-14 Joint Library Evolution and Language Evolution Telecon Minutes

Chair: Bryce Adelstein Lelbach

Champion: Ville Voutilainen

Minute Taker: Inbal Levi

Start: 2021-06-14 08:04 Pacific

What does urgent mean?

How will authors find wordsmiths?

This would probably need to be codified in a standing document.

Attendance (self identified as Evolution telecon regulars): 11

Attendance (self identifies as Library Evolution telecon regulars): 12

POLL: Adopt P2138R4 as the official process of the C++ Evolution groups.

Strongly Favor	Weakly Favor	Neutral	Weakly Against	Strongly Against
5	6	6	1	0

Attendance: 24

# of Authors: 1

Author Position: SF

Outcome: Consensus in favor.

Should go to electronic polls next, then possibly plenary.

End: 09:15

Summary

We reviewed P2138R4 (Rules of Design <=> Specification engagement), a paper that proposes formalizing our design and specification process and adding some checks and balances that aim to improve the quality of the International Standard and avoid inefficient uses of committee time. The author of P2138R4 believes much of what this paper proposes is already our defacto process, or what we intend our defacto process to be.

We discussed when exceptions from the process would be needed, such as for urgent work, like NB comment responses or bug fixes. We also talked about whether adopting this proposal would increase the burden on proposal authors and increase the amount of time that it takes for proposals to land, and whether that was a bug or a feature.

P2138R4 asks proposal authors to find a wordsmith for both Evolution and Library Evolution proposals. We talked about the challenges associated with this. How will authors know who wordsmiths are? Will we have a sufficient quantity of wordsmiths volunteering to help authors? Will wordsmiths become a bottleneck?

We also discussed the need to document these changes to our process if they are adopted, in either a standing document or the existing documentation on isocpp.org.

Outcome

We had consensus on the telecon that we should adopt P2138R4 as the official process of the C++ Evolution groups. The paper will go to Library Evolution electronic polls as a next step.

[brycelelbach]

The paper is being placed on the Summer 2021 electronic ballot.

[brycelelbach]

2021 Summer Library Evolution Polls

P2435: 2021 Summer Library Evolution Poll Outcomes

POLL 1: Make a joint Library Evolution and Evolution plenary to adopt P2138R4 (Rules of Design <=> Wording Engagement) as the official process of the C++ Evolution groups.

Strongly Favor	Weakly Favor	Neutral	Weakly Against	Strongly Against
5	14	2	6	6

Outcome: No consensus.

2021 Summer Evolution Polls

P1018R13: 2021 Summer Evolution Poll Outcomes

POLL 1: Make a joint Library Evolution and Evolution plenary to adopt P2138R4 (Rules of Design <=> Wording Engagement) as the official process of the C++ Evolution groups.

Strongly Favor	Weakly Favor	Neutral	Weakly Against	Strongly Against
6	15	3	3	6

Outcome: No consensus.

Outcome

We will not proceed with adopting this paper.

[jfbastien]

EWG poll results from https://wg21.link/P1018R13

🗳 Poll: For the next plenary, put up the following joint Language and Library Evolution motion: P2138r4 "Rules of Design <=> Wording engagement" as the official process of the C++ Evolution groups.

SF	F	N	A	SA
6	15	3	3	6

Poll outcome: ❌ no consensus.