The second review of "SE-0091: Improving operator requirements in protocols" ran from July 7...12, 2016. The proposal has been *accepted with revision*:
The second iteration of this proposal has been very well received by both the community and core team. The core team requests one minor modification: in an effort to reduce the scope of the proposal, it should specifically require that operator declarations in classes be written as static (or equivalently, as “final class”). In the future, support for operators may be extended to support dynamic dispatch, and the core team wants to keep the design space open. The core team also observed that the impact on the standard library is not captured in this proposal, but that can be incorporated later (as an amendment to this proposal) since it should have little user impact.
Thank you to Tony Allevato and Doug Gregor for driving this discussion forward! I filed SR-2073 to track implementation work on this.