On Mon, 15 Mar 2021, Sven Panne wrote:

Somehow I'm getting more and more allergic to all these hasty unwarranted "I want to take over package XY" requests. The last release of cryptonite was less than 7 weeks ago, a PR for foundation was not merged within 5 weeks, etc. etc.  For god's sake: If you are in such a hurry, just fork locally! Or even better: Give the maintainers a huge pile of $$$, most of them are doing their stuff in their spare time, so you can't expect SLAs where you would have to spend 5 digit sums as a company.

I like this reasoning! If you cannot solve a problem with money, you can solve it with a lot of money.

I'm not sure if these issues affect those particular packages, but the ecosystem should not be in a rush for GHC 9 compatibility, due to a few issues with unsafePerformIO which may be serious blockers. Kindly pump the brakes on this and wait until ghc 9.0.2 at least. See: https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/19413 (But I do generally agree that we should push for widely-used projects to have more co-maintainers.) -- Dan Burton On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 5:13 AM Simon Jakobi via Haskell-Cafe < haskell-cafe@haskell.org> wrote:

With regards to basement, I think it's neither hasty nor unwarranted to push for new maintainers. Vincent has been aware of the compatibility issue with GHC 9.0 for nearly 3 months:

https://github.com/haskell-infra/hackage-trustees/issues/284#issuecomment-75...

Now that GHC 9.0.1 has been out for over 5 weeks, I think it's pretty reasonable to expect that a package as central as basement should get a compatible release.

...

:

Am Mo., 15. März 2021 um 01:17 Uhr schrieb Kazu Yamamoto

...

We should also take care of "memory", "foundation" and "basement". No action is taken for over a month to https://github.com/haskell-foundation/foundation/pull/549

Somehow I'm getting more and more allergic to all these hasty unwarranted "I want to take over package XY" requests. The last release of cryptonite was less than 7 weeks ago, a PR for foundation was not merged within 5 weeks, etc. etc. For god's sake: If you are in such a hurry, just fork locally! Or even better: Give the maintainers a huge pile of $$$, most of them are doing their stuff in their spare time, so you can't expect SLAs where you would have to spend 5 digit sums as a company. Or you can fork visibly on e.g. GitHub under a different package name and let other people decide which variant to take.

"Taking over" a package can almost be seen as robbery from the point of view of the original author, and it is actively discouraging people to make

Am Mo., 15. März 2021 um 09:06 Uhr schrieb Sven Panne

...

Having said that, I think that a few projects are blocked by stack

issues before they can support GHC 9.0. It would be great if things would be released more in lock-step, I dream of a world where a new GHC comes out in sync with cabal, stack, Stackage, Haskell language server etc. all supporting the new compiler. Other language ecosystems are lightyears ahead regarding this... :-/

...

Cheers, S. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.