Evaluate a Contribution first, MR second approach
Point originally raised by @chatras.
It may happen that a MR is syntactically correct but the overall feature proposed is rejected by the TB/WG because of several reasons. Could we evaluate a way to gauge level of approval before actually working on the code?
Solutions proposed during the meeting:
- Present a discussion paper before presenting the new feature
- Reserve a contribution with a clear abstract, and trigger feedback on the official mailing list
Also, should the flow be changed to address this need? (E.g. adding an activity about presenting a discussion paper).