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/

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