Hi, Am Freitag, den 06.11.2020, 19:55 +0000 schrieb Richard Eisenberg:
This is an effective argument; you've changed my mind.
I'm now in favor of Joachim's simpler process.
thanks, also for making me get more clarity on this as well. Is anyone still preferring Alternative 2, or should we take it off the table? Is anyone not in favor of this proposal, or has questions, or shall we declare consensus and merge it? It seems that now is a good time to then actually do the first iteration of the process – the State of Haskell survey data, once out, will be fresh, and we'd be well in time for inclusion in the Spring release of GHC, likely 9.1 (unless the 9.0 delay shifts things around… oh well, let’s just make sure we have GHC2021 defined before or near the start of 2021, not late in that year :-)) Cheers, Joachim -- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/