Jason Desrosiers

> I guess it depends on how we view the suite. Is it intended to be a representation of the spec, or is it just a tool for implementers? I...

> move from proposals/ to the main directory when the feature has been accepted and we do not anticipate any material changes are still to come It's unclear what you...

> This seems backwards to my understanding. I'm not likely to implement something if it's not in the spec yet (even the tentative version of the next one). I may...

> > For example, it would go from "proposal" to "experimental" to "2027". > > I think this would be a good signal to implementors of what features they need...

I don't think this is the right approach. I think we've seen pretty conclusively from the lack of use of the vocabulary system in the last ~6 years that people...

> Maybe include its support as a MAY requirement to let implementations decide. I don't know about that. It would mean it would work in some implementations, but not others....

I was thinking that we can allow implementations to support `#`, but only by configuration that's off by default. But then I thought, they can do that anyway without us...

> This, to me, says that implementations can have a debug mode that handles them. The dev is not the end user, so that's fine. I suppose it then becomes...

I'm going to go ahead with this. I'm going to rewrite it because it doesn't make sense to me and no one has offered an explanation. I plan to go...

Oh, that's weird. There's no reason there should be different tests in those three versions. It looks like someone broke that test in 2020-12, but didn't make the change in...