Thanks for pushing this forward.

As a maybe tangential comment: There is no mention of an identifier for an RFC (e.g. PEP number) or a unique string to identify or reference it?


On January 6, 2025 11:29:21 PM GMT+01:00, "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
Hello,

As proposed before, here’s a reworked version based on v5. The intent
is to keep the spirit and process unchanged compared to v5, while making
the document a bit more concise (239 lines, v5 was 322), improving
consistency for key words, hopefully improving wording, fixing
grammatical issues, and adding Markdown ornaments where appropriate.

Notable changes:

• Instead of “supporter” and “co-supporter”, I propose “author(s)” and
“supporter(s)” (there must be at least one supporter).

• Explicitly state the license of RFCs (CC-BY-SA or GFDL).

• Clarify that the deliberation period lasts exactly 14 days (was “up
to 14 days” in one place, “14 days” in another).

• Consistently name the different periods.

• Remove mention of the ‘withdrawn/’ directory: it’s redundant with
the ‘status’ header.

• Clarify what to do with “deprecated” RFCs.

• Clarify headers of this RFC.

• Clarify that this is not just for technical changes.

I can proofread and possibly propose minor tweaks the template
afterwards.

Thoughts?

Ludo’.

-- Sent from /e/OS Mail.