IF-BODY

["Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>]

I'm willing to go along with releasing KMP's latest revision of IF-BODY,
even though it doesn't properly argue the case that manufacturers should
provide reasonable portability tools before using non-portability as an
argument for changing the language.

I am confident that this proposal will be defeated and then we'll be
done with it.  If I am wrong, I can probably live with that.  (Of
course, any CMU programmers caught using extended-IF would get a "mild"
electric shock to remind them that legal Common Lisp is not necessarily
acceptable Common Lisp.)

What is important to me is not that we hold up this particular issue,
but that in the future we adopt an adversarial system for putting
together proposals on which we cannot reach a consensus.  Nobody should
be put in the position of having to summarize a position he doesn't
agree with; it's a very difficult, thankless task for the summarizer,
and the opposition is likely to feel screwed anyway.  Each side should
get some space in which to argue its case, and nobody should edit the
result.

-- Scott