Bob Myers (2016-05-14T05:02:11.000Z)
rtm at gol.com (2016-05-14T10:27:46.492Z)
This entire process is quite unfriendly to grassroots proposals and I hope it can be tweaked. > All proposals that are officially considered by TC39 have to have been submitted in conformance with the Ecma IPR policies including the RF patent policy and the software copyright policy. Is putting a proposal into the stage 0 list, so people can see it, considered to be "officially considered by TC39"? In any case, there is already a mechanism in place (registration) for anyone to agree to the IPR policies. > A TC39 member champion is necessary for a proposal in order to get items on meeting agendas and to lead meeting discussions relating to the proposal. Fine, but before we get to meetings and agendas we are talking about just putting a proposal on the list of stage 0 proposals so it's on the radar. The CONTRIBUTING.md file you reference explicitly states (my emphasis): > Ecma TC39 accepts contributions from *non-member individuals who have accepted the TC39 copyright and patent policies*. This seems to be in conflict with what I understand you are saying. Is it wrong? If so, can someone fix it? But then later in the document it says > convince others that your proposal is a useful addition to the language and recruit TC39 members and > If you have a new proposal you want to get into the language, you first need a TC39 champion Is there a distinction here between a "contribution" and a "proposal"? Then in https://tc39.github.io/process-document/, it says that there is a "strawman" stage 0 and lists the "Entrance Requirements" as "none". In the same document, it says > Ideas for evolving the ECMAScript language are accepted in any form. Any discussion, idea or proposal for a change or addition which has not been submitted as a formal proposal is considered to be a “strawman” (stage 0) and *has no acceptance requirements*. Such submissions must either come from members of TC39 or from *non-members who have registered via Ecma International*. Is this incorrect? If so, it should be fixed. > I agree that TC39 could do a better job at providing an in-take process. For example, it could have a “Request for consideration” channel and a regular agenda item to solicit members who may have an interest in championing such requests. But setting that up requires some TC39 member(s) who are interested in championing that process change and managing it going forward. Hmmm, a champion for a process to find champions? One idea that springs to mind is to have a forward-looking TC39 member agree to serve as interim champion for grassroots proposals from non-insiders, although they would need to be able to reject extremely poor proposals. By the way, the current stage 0 list at https://github.com/tc39/proposals/blob/master/stage-0-proposals.md starts off by saying that "Stage 0 proposals have been presented to the committee", but then includes proposals with the rocket ship icon which are "as not yet presented to the committee". Which is it? Are stage 0 proposals supposed to be presented to the committee to acquire that status, or not, or it varies? It's also worth noting that a number of these stage 0 proposals are very old, and/or their docs indicate they have been superseded, or in one case have no link to anything, Is there any process for removing things from the stage 0 list? In other words, is it as hard to get off the list as to get on it? My two cents. -- Bob On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com> wrote:
rtm at gol.com (2016-05-14T05:05:31.320Z)
This entire process is quite unfriendly to grassroots proposals and I hope it can be tweaked. > All proposals that are officially considered by TC39 have to have been submitted in conformance with the Ecma IPR policies including the RF patent policy and the software copyright policy. Is putting a proposal into the stage 0 list, so people can see it, considered to be "officially considered by TC39"? There is already a mechanism in place (registration) for anyone to agree to the IPR policies. > A TC39 member champion is necessary for a proposal in order to get items on meeting agendas and to lead meeting discussions relating to the proposal. Fine, but before we get to meetings and agendas we are talking about just putting a proposal on the list of stage 0 proposals so it's on the radar. The CONTRIBUTING.md file you reference explicitly states (my emphasis): > Ecma TC39 accepts contributions from *non-member individuals who have accepted the TC39 copyright and patent policies*. This seems to be in conflict with what I understand you are saying. Is it wrong? If so, can someone fix it? But then later in the document it says > convince others that your proposal is a useful addition to the language and recruit TC39 members and > If you have a new proposal you want to get into the language, you first need a TC39 champion Is there a distinction here between a "contribution" and a "proposal"? Then in https://tc39.github.io/process-document/, it says that there is a "strawman" stage 0 and lists the "Entrance Requirements" as "none". In the same document, it says > Ideas for evolving the ECMAScript language are accepted in any form. Any discussion, idea or proposal for a change or addition which has not been submitted as a formal proposal is considered to be a “strawman” (stage 0) and *has no acceptance requirements*. Such submissions must either come from members of TC39 or from *non-members who have registered via Ecma International*. Is this incorrect? If so, it should be fixed. > I agree that TC39 could do a better job at providing an in-take process. For example, it could have a “Request for consideration” channel and a regular agenda item to solicit members who may have an interest in championing such requests. But setting that up requires some TC39 member(s) who are interested in championing that process change and managing it going forward. Hmmm, a champion for a process to find champions? One idea that springs to mind is to have a forward-looking TC39 member agree to serve as interim champion for grassroots proposals from non-insiders, although they would need to be able to reject extremely poor proposals. By the way, the current stage 0 list at https://github.com/tc39/proposals/blob/master/stage-0-proposals.md starts off by saying that "Stage 0 proposals have been presented to the committee", but then includes proposals with the rocket ship icon which are "as not yet presented to the committee". Which is it? Are stage 0 proposals supposed to be presented to the committee to acquire that status, or not, or it varies? It's also worth noting that a number of these stage 0 proposals are very old, and/or their docs indicate they have been superseded, or in one case have no link to anything, Is there any process for removing things from the stage 0 list? My two cents. -- Bob On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com> wrote: