<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Dec 4, 2020, at 9:28 PM, Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">I'm not really a fan of having another build system in tree, but I also<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">don't want to keep devoting a lot of time to arguing about it. I was<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">hoping that with the pitch process, we could avoid the kind of back and<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">forth arguing on the list that typically make these RFCs so tiring.<br class=""><br class="">I still don't quite understand why there is so much push back against<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">pitches, but I think everyone knows my perspective now, so I'm going to<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">step back and let other people work out what the next steps should be.<br class=""></blockquote><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" class="">Can only speak for myself: I believe pitches should be more of a "last resort" than "the normal way of driving any proposal". I object to what I see using too easily a "pitch" as a way to "work around discussions”.</div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>Right, it is an intentionally fairly heavy weight process, so it should be used sparingly. That doesn’t mean it is a “last resort” thing though, we can use it when we think it will be valuable.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Random nit: please refer to it as the “LLVM Proposal Process”, a pitch is just one stage of that process.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>-Chris</div></body></html>