[J3] posts

[Keith Bierman]

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:17 AM Vipul Parekh via J3 <
j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:

...quoting OO above My own opinion is also that we absolutely have to give
some feedback for every proposal.

>
> Or is the view here that J3 is unable and/or unwilling to multitask
> even a little?
>

I can't comment on the committee's current workings or thinking. But
recalling similar discussions and some unfortunate outcomes from the past
....


   1. Do not underestimate how hard it is to get consensus on WHY. Feedback
   to a proposal other than "thanks for your input" can take an almost
   unbounded amount of time. People can agree it would be nice, disagree as to
   why it is nice, how it should be implemented, how fast it should be
   implemented, whether it can be implemented. Having opened up the box of
   snakes, it takes a long time to put them back. Also, any entrenched hard
   feelings dug up by such discussions can impede other work, where painful
   compromises have already been made, but not completed.
   2. What the committee *has* to do is defined by ANSI (and/or ISO
   depending on context). What the committee should do may be very different.
   If a debate about *has* to do is required, quote chapter and verse from the
   relevant organizational documents.


The pain, suffering, and delays of F9x should never be repeated. A focus on
consensus positions on public comment was certainly not the root of all
problems ... but it certainly was seriously unhelpful.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20200122/a16b2127/attachment.htm>