Good points.
How about this: when you do the work for your monthly email, you update the spreadsheet, including a prominent date saying "this was true on date X". Zero extra work for you.
That way I can have a bookmark to a table that shows a decent approximation to the status quo. I find it hard to grep back through mountains of email, be sure I'm looking at the latest status update from you, etc. It's enough friction that I just don't do it.
Tom, our "nudger" will find that useful -- and will doubtless update it if he knows the status has changed (e.g he nudges someone and they say "oh I did that").
The rest of us (esp shepherds) can use it as an aide memoire. (What proposals am I responsible for?)
Would that be ok?
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: ghc-steering-committee On
| Behalf Of Joachim Breitner
| Sent: 01 July 2021 20:06
| To: ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: [ghc-steering-committee] GHC proposals
|
| Hi,
|
| I understand the desire to have a constantly updated "dashboard". But I
| don't think a spreadsheed will work. At least not if your expectation is
| that we, collaboratively, keep it up to date. If we already fall behind our
| actual review commitments, surely we'll fall behind additional red tape
| commitments. And then we'll have a file that we can't rely on because we
| wouldn't be confident that it actually reflects reality.
|
| And it's not that I hates manual solutions. In fact, my semi-regular
| "status" emails are fully manual! In a way you did more or less what I do
| every time I create these: I did through my email and curate the current
| status quo. This is tenable because it's clear who does it (the secretary,
| instead of everybody), and because it's an email there is no confusion as
| whether it is is up to date - is is up to date the moment I write it, and
| makes no promises about later states.
|
| So that's a difference in frequency, form and ownership (at intervals vs.
| continous; push email vs. pull URL; collectively vs. secretarial).
| Your sheet also contains additional fields (Author, various dates) - maybe I
| should include them in the status email.
|
| I don't want to stop us from trying out different procedures, though, so if
| there is a general sentiment that a wiki-like process (everyone
| collaboratively edits a common file) is worth exploring, we can do that of
| course. But I miss the "yes please and I definitely will keep it up to date"
| cries from our crowd :-)
|
| Ultimately, the best would be a tool that uses the Github API to create a
| dashboard (Note that most information on your sheet is already present in
| github, especially as all status changes are represented as label changes),
| maybe even with automatic nudging on github or email.
|
| The next best thing is someone (but someone, not somemany) doing that
| manually; maintaining a dashboard like yours, plus nudging. But who wants to
| do manually what can be done (mostly) automated.
|
|
| Cheers,
| Joachim
|
|
| Am Montag, dem 28.06.2021 um 09:56 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton Jones via
| ghc-steering-committee:
| > I'm a bit concerned that we are falling down on our commitment to
| > decide about GHC proposals in a timely manner.
| > Part of the problem is that at any moment I don't have a clear
| > snapshot in my head of what decisions are pending, and who is driving
| > them. I know that Joachim hates manual solutions, but I have spent a
| > few minutes digging through my email to build
| > * this spreadsheet giving the current status You all have edit
| > permissions. It covers only the handful of proposals that are in our
| > court. Can I suggest that we all use it to keep ourselves on the
| > ball? E.g. as a shepherd you can use it to record who you are
| > waiting for, as I have done for #302.
| > You'll notice that we are behind on every one of them. Remember, if
| > there edits we want the author to make, we push it back, out of our
| > court. It can re-enter when the author re-submits.
| > If our commitments are over-ambitious, let's review them.
| > Tom: you are our official nudger. Would you like to make you weekly
| > nudge into an email to the full committee, with a pointer to the
| > spreadsheet and your current understanding of who is responsible for
| > driving?
| > I hope this is helpful. If not, let's think of something else!
| > Simon
| > _______________________________________________
| > ghc-steering-committee mailing list
| > ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
| > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail
| > .haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-committee&a
| > mp;data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C339ecde3cd0345bb56c008d93c
| > c3520b%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637607632780784446
| > %7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6I
| > k1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=hBK7hEfFzJhRh3iYskV8MCwHpr2jMYC
| > c6Ed7fCUu0ro%3D&reserved=0
|
| --
| Joachim Breitner
| mail@joachim-breitner.de
|
| https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.joachim
| -
| breitner.de%2F&data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C339ecde3cd0345bb
| 56c008d93cc3520b%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63760763278079
| 4437%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1
| haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=vn6ZhpdEb9QPd5KIMw6Wmg3QO7u51PJVNhlTSQO
| nJBQ%3D&reserved=0
|
|
| _______________________________________________
| ghc-steering-committee mailing list
| ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
| https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.haske
| ll.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-
| committee&data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C339ecde3cd0345bb56c00
| 8d93cc3520b%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637607632780794437%
| 7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwi
| LCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=EmSqsU2w3ARP3hXLA3xshhOt6zw%2Bn8LVx3qAy7sIGl
| g%3D&reserved=0
