Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Question about "Add Unified Namespace" (#270)

16 Oct 2019

      I am fine with committing Simon's changes to the process, although
having read through them I am unclear on what action should I take.
Here are some idea:

   1. should I remove the label "Pending Shepherd Recommendation" and
un-assign myself as a shepherd? or
   2. remove the label, but stay as a shepherd, or
   3. change the label to "Needs revision", or
   4. do nothing, and stay in the current state until the discussion
settles down?

-Iavor

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 6:18 AM Eric Seidel  wrote:
...
Agreed, I think we can commit it at this point.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019, at 05:47, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
...
Support seems quite positive on that. I think we can commit. (There's
not really a shepherd here because it's all internal.)
...
On Oct 16, 2019, at 10:36 AM, Simon Peyton Jones  wrote:
This is covered in my still-pending PR
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/271
in exactly the way Richard describes.
Can we commit it?  It's been pending for ages.  But NB: it's not just typography and presentation: it has actual content.
Simon
|  -----Original Message-----
|  From: ghc-steering-committee 
|  On Behalf Of Richard Eisenberg
|  Sent: 15 October 2019 22:08
|  To: Iavor Diatchki 
|  Cc: ghc-steering-committee 
|  Subject: Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Question about "Add Unified
|  Namespace" (#270)
|
|  My interpretation is that as soon as discussion (that might change the
|  content of the proposal) picks up, the proposal should go back into the
|  discussion state. It's not good for us to have "pending recommendation"
|  for a long time.
|
|  Richard
|
|  > On Oct 15, 2019, at 7:37 PM, Iavor Diatchki 
|  wrote:
|  >
|  > Hello,
|  >
|  > I am the shepherd for #270, "Add Unified Namesapce", which was
|  > submitted for us to review around September 25.   I read the proposal
|  > when it was submitted, but pretty much since then there has been
|  > continuing discussion with various new ideas being fleshed out.
|  >
|  > So, I've been waiting for things to stabilize a bit, before I re-read
|  > it, and ask for feedback from the committee.   Given that it has been
|  > about 3 weeks, and there are still more comments and suggestions, I
|  > was wondering if it would be appropriate to move it back to the
|  > "discussion" phase,
|  > or if we should leave things as they are and keep waiting.
|  >
|  > Thoughts?
|  >
|  > -Iavor
|  > _______________________________________________
|  > ghc-steering-committee mailing list
|  > ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
|  > https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
|
|  _______________________________________________
|  ghc-steering-committee mailing list
|  ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
|  https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee