mirror of
https://github.com/semver/semver.git
synced 2026-07-11 03:53:53 -05:00
[GH-ISSUE #253] Create an RFC #6167
No Assignees
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: github-starred/semver#6167
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @LastTalon on GitHub (May 9, 2015).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/semver/semver/issues/253
This may have been suggested before, but this would be great to submit as an RFC itself.
@bperrybap commented on GitHub (May 9, 2015):
There are different types of RFCs. Informational RFCs don't really mean squat since anyone can submit an informational RFC about anything including the Easter bunny. Getting something beyond an information RFC is not easy which is why so many things are published as information RFCs.
@LastTalon commented on GitHub (May 9, 2015):
Well sure, but that doesn't mean its not useful to have as an RFC. I actually never expected something like this to be anything other than an informational RFC.
@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Dec 8, 2017):
@LastTalon, request for comments implies someone will have time to review and respond to those comments. Are you volunteering? If so, please submit a PR. If not, please close this issue at your earliest possible convenience.
@FichteFoll commented on GitHub (Dec 8, 2017):
I disagree that the issue should be closed if OP does not volunteer for this. Someone else might.
@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2017):
@FichteFoll, certainly, but when? It's been two years. The issue can always be revived when someone has time to pick it up.
@nowox commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2018):
I agree with this issue. Writing an RFC would give confidence in people to use SemVer
@FichteFoll commented on GitHub (Jun 11, 2018):
People are and have been using semver for years already. I do not think having an RFC will realistically impose more confidence in using it. However, I don't think it'd hurt to have one. It's just that nobody's willing to write/handle it.
@steveklabnik commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2019):
We are now using internal RFCs as a means of changing SemVer itself. This issue is about IETF RFCs, I assume.
I'm not aware of any plan to submit to the IETF, and I'm not aware of any desire to by the team, either. That doesn't mean that it would be bad, necessarily, but I don't see the cost/benefit ratio making sense. So I'm going to close this as
WONTFIX, essentially. If there's suddenly huge demand for this, we can reconsider. Thanks!