Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Please review #517: Require implementors before proposal submission, Shepherd: Simon PJ

Hello, while I think the problem exists and would welcome a process refinement, it certainly isn’t so big to spend too much of our own attention on it (which is the precise resource I was trying to save). And it certainly isn’t pressing enough to hold a vote when there isn’t consensus. So given that we don’t have a consensus, I suggest to not spend more time on it, let’s reject it (and remember where it is to be revived, if and when the problem becomes more clearer visible). Cheers, Joachim (with no pride dented, no worries) Am Dienstag, dem 20.09.2022 um 15:09 +0200 schrieb Spiwack, Arnaud:

I haven't been convinced yet. As I said in my previous email, I'm a priori against this proposal. But this is a gut feeling. More importantly than that, I don't feel that we have documented how other communities handle this. I also don't feel that the number of unimplemented proposals is so high as to be a problem.

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 7:42 PM Joachim Breitner wrote:

...

Hi,

also in light of the discussion at Haskell Symposium, can we proceed with this (or drop this)? Arnaud was most vocally in the “against” camp; are you still against it?

NB: Opening PRs and discussing them with the general public is welcome even before implementors have been found, and committee members can of course join that discussion. Only the formal committee submission would be blocked until implementors have been found.

Cheers, Joachim

_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee

-- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/