From 7e3661f74bfe7b6075f1cb32875fce94a70520aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kyle Mathews Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 13:59:38 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] fix: avoid language that suggests implementations of an RFC should wait for it to be accepted (#36) It's often a good idea to prototype an implementation of an RFC while it's being deliberated as many designs can't be created without trying out the code. --- README.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index a4d63c6c3329..d55d1df4770a 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -82,8 +82,8 @@ become 'active'. ## The RFC life-cycle -Once an RFC becomes active, then authors may implement it and submit the -feature as a pull request to the Gatsby repo. Becoming 'active' is not a rubber +Once an RFC becomes active, then authors may submit a finished implementation of it +as a pull request to the Gatsby repo. Becoming 'active' is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not mean the feature will ultimately be merged; it does mean that the core team has agreed to it in principle and are amenable to merging it.