Hi, Am Dienstag, dem 10.01.2023 um 10:31 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton Jones:
It seems a very funny way to do it. I'd prefer to ask "what cadence do we want" and then move on to discuss features individually. At the moment I might think "yes, extension X belongs in the next GHC20xx", so do I vote yes or no for X?
Ah, I see the confusion. The question is _not_ about “the next GHC20xx”, but it is about “GHC2023”, i.e. what do we want to no. The answer may well be “no extension is pressing enough to make a release now”. A year ago we concluded to
don’t work on defining GHC2022, and the next update will be GHC2023 (or later).
and now we have to decide if it’s going to be GHC2023 or later. Maybe what I want to say is that by deciding whether we have GHC2023 or not, we are (implicitly) setting a precedence for what could become a regular cadence, should we not change our minds in the following years.
What do other members of the committee think about cadence? RSVP! You are a member!
I’m also curious :-) Cheers, Joachim -- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/