Print

Print


HI Sylvain,

I do take all of your points, and what you say is probably right;
however, I think the scale of debate and proposed change that would be
generated by addressing the problem more broadly, as you propose, would
mean that nothing would be done for years. P5 is now (as far as I
understand it) closed to further proposals, so that would mean that
nothing would be done in P5 at all.

My feeling right now is this:

1) even as it stands, this is a practical, useful, and self-contained
addition, which I'm already using, and other people have expressed
approval of;

2) we should make every effort to help get P5 released in a stable
format before the end of this year; and

3) if we get involved in a detailed debate to come up with a better,
more generic solution, then nothing will be included in P5 for this purpose.

So I think from a pragmatic point of view, while I agree that there
should be a serious debate about this for P6, I'd really like to get
your approval for including this proposal in P5, so that at least we
have something for the purpose in P5. We will all be using P5 for years,
and I think on balance it will be better for tool developers if we have
something, rather than nothing.

What do you think?

Best regards,
Martin