The current README doesn't specify how we as a community decide whether an RFC is rejected or approved.
Some possibilities:
- Our glorious BDFL Raph makes the decision. (Although this is exactly the kind of responsibility he's trying to decentralize, so probably not.)
- The issue is set to a vote. Follow up question: who's the voting pool?
- Each RFC is assigned (by Raph?) a maintainer, who makes the ultimate decision.
In any case, we also need to figure out when the above happens. Does each PR have an expiration date after which a decision must be made? Or does the approve/reject decision only happen when the author requests it?
In any case, we probably don't want to overthink this too much, or rely on automation besides basic Github features. We're not at the scope of eg the Rust project who do need very elaborate processes.
The current README doesn't specify how we as a community decide whether an RFC is rejected or approved.
Some possibilities:
In any case, we also need to figure out when the above happens. Does each PR have an expiration date after which a decision must be made? Or does the approve/reject decision only happen when the author requests it?
In any case, we probably don't want to overthink this too much, or rely on automation besides basic Github features. We're not at the scope of eg the Rust project who do need very elaborate processes.