Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Add policy note about re-opening old bikesheds. #9

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 12, 2016
Merged

Add policy note about re-opening old bikesheds. #9

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
061a0a9
Add policy note about re-opening old bikesheds.
solson Sep 11, 2016
e0873f8
Reword "new information" note.
solson Sep 12, 2016
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 5 additions & 1 deletion README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -12,6 +12,10 @@ Where this process is under-specified, see the process for [Rust RFCs](https://g
* If there is no single, obvious style, then open a GitHub issue on the
fmt-rfcs repo for initial discussion. This initial discussion should identify
which Rustfmt options are required to enforce the guideline.
- Search for existing issues and RFCs that may have already covered the topic.
To discourage endless bikeshedding, the style team will close new discussions
on old topics unless they provide fresh information or alternatives that were
not previously considered.
* Implement the style in rustfmt (behind an option if it is not the current
default). In exceptional circumstances (such as where the implementation would
require very deep changes to rustfmt), this step may be skipped.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -99,4 +103,4 @@ The author of an RFC is not required to implement the guideline. If you are
interested in working on the implementation for an 'active' RFC, but cannot
determine if someone else is already working on it, feel free to ask (e.g. by
leaving a comment on the associated issue).