Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Why not?, rather than, why?

I think we are on the same page, but the thread seemed to be taking an authoritarian turn so I thought it best to ensure the voices of caution were represented! Chris

On 2 Dec 2022, at 17:39, Joachim Breitner wrote:

Hi,

Am Freitag, dem 02.12.2022 um 17:27 +0000 schrieb Chris Dornan:

...

I am sympathetic to the idea of a new language standard that we promote heavily and encourage developers, tools, tutorials and courseware to favour —if we get this right then we will reap the benefits of a strong standard. But if we take it upon ourselves to try and force an extension combination of our choosing on the community because we believe the community will benefit from a big reset then I think it could blow up on us really badly, with forks and factions which could be truly difficult to manage — and fatally discourage adoption.

ah, sorry if I was unclear. I am certainly not proposing a form of “big reset”! It’s more about “should every language extension be in principle on track towards in inclusion to a future GHC20xx” – still all incremental and cautious.

Cheers, Joachim

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

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