
Usually, I would agree with what you are writing. However, this is a special situation as Atze never actually started to participate as a member of this committee. The situation is the same as when he had declined Simon and Simon’s original request. In that case, Simon and Simon would just have picked somebody else. Hence, if both Simons are in favour of replacing Atze by Roman, I think, we should just do this and, if they want to pick somebody else, the same applies. Personally, I would love to have somebody from SC involved as they are one of the biggest commercial users of Haskell. That is a very valuable perspective to tap into. Manuel
Joachim Breitner
: Hi Committee,
it is very thoughtful of Atze to suggest a replacement as he steps down, and I have no reasons to doubt Roman’s qualification. But given that one purpose of instantiating the committee is to make governance a bit more transparent, I think it would be nice to publicly announce that we have a spot to fill and solicit nominations.
We can mention that we try to maintain our existing nice balance between academics, industry users etc, and surely selecting Roman is a possible, maybe likely, outcome. Nevertheless it would not hurt doing so publicly.
Although it would look better if we actually accepted some proposal first, to show that the committee is doing more than just filling seats :-)
We had no objections to Simon’s suggestion to adopt
- Update levity polymorphism - Constraint vs type
so I take that as “the committee agrees”. Ben, as the committee’s de- facto secretary, would you merge and label these proposals?
Greetings, Joachim
-- -- Joachim “nomeata” Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de • https://www.joachim-breitner.de/ XMPP: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de • OpenPGP-Key: 0xF0FBF51F Debian Developer: nomeata@debian.org_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee