Re: Patch management workflow for threads that peter out (was: Re: [PATCH] Fix [:IDENT:] vs posixidentifiers)

[Lawrence Velázquez <larryv@xxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Mar 29, 2021, at 3:26 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Bart Schaefer wrote on Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 23:35:58 -0700:
> > On Sun, Mar 28, 2021, 11:30 PM Daniel Shahaf <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > That does bring up the point of what to do with threads that peter out
> > > without a review.  I suggest that they be added to Etc/BUGS.  WDYT?
> > >
> > 
> > Only if they actually are threads about bug fixes.  Proposed new features
> > or completion improvements, just as examples, don't belong in the BUGS file.
> 
> Are you objecting just to the name of the file, or to recording them at
> all?  I.e., would recording them in an 
> Etc/PROPOSED-NEW-FEATURES-AND-COMPLETION-IMPROVEMENTS
> file be better?

Perhaps something like DISCUSSIONS?  OPEN-DISCUSSIONS?  SUBMISSIONS?
PROPOSALS?

(Reviving this because there are several discussions coming up on
their third reminders, so I'm thinking about submitting a patch to
list them in the repository somewhere.)

-- 
vq