On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Ian Lynagh
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:16:33PM +0100, Gregory Collins wrote:
* it is better to avoid tedious discussion even if it means taking 2 steps forward and 1 step back sometimes. Rolling back a controversial patch is an O(1) operation.
Only if it is noticed before the next GHC major release.
One of the main reasons the library process was created was to get people to look at changes before it is too late.
Reviewing all patches to base and all the libraries maintained under the libraries process is more work than we can expect you and e.g. the Simons to do. However, the libraries process is not substitute for having a maintainer and I think we're fooling ourselves in trying to solve the problem of lack of maintainer (e.g. your) time by outsourcing the job to libraries@. We should instead be looking for more maintainers. Johan