Re: Why base library changes are only discussed on GHC issue tracker and not on the libraries@ list?

There aren't. You are the last to edit that page: https://wiki.haskell.org/index.php?title=Library_submissions&action=history - Oleg On 7.7.2021 20.37, Carter Schonwald wrote:

It’s probably worth looking at the wiki edit history too.  

I’m pretty sure some edits were done to the policy in the past 18 months without community feedback or discussion. 

On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 1:33 PM Oleg Grenrus mailto:oleg.grenrus@iki.fi> wrote:

Thanks for this reply. It made me reread https://wiki.haskell.org/Library_submissions https://wiki.haskell.org/Library_submissions page. In the Guide to proposers section it says:

- All library proposals should start on the relevant issue tracker. - At this point, the library maintainer is responsible for taking next steps. - ... or decide that this is a controversial decision that must be discussed with the CLC.

- If the CLC decides that the discussion must be discussed with the libraries@ mailing list, the original proposer may be asked to moderate the libraries@ mailing list discussion

So do I understand right: it's up to the base-library maintainer to decide whether a change is controversial and must to be discussed with CLC, which in can elevate it to wider discussion or not.

The page however lists Edward Kmett and Ryan Scott as base-maintainers, which I'm pretty sure is not right. Who are the base maintainers?

I'm sorry for my misunderstanding, it seems you are right Sandy, the issues should be discussed in the issue trackers first, and only elevated to libraries@ list if CLC decides it needs to! That is much more reasonable then going to the libraries@ directly for every issue.

- Oleg

On 7.7.2021 19.41, Sandy Maguire wrote:

...

At risk of being the messenger who gets shot....

As an outsider, it seems very reasonable to me to file a bug against the issue tracker for a project whose code I think should be changed. For better or worse, this is the way that 99% of software projects work. Expecting everyone in the community to know that they _shouldn't_ be filing bugs against the issue tracker is a losing battle. I'm more hooked in than most, and even I didn't know this.

I can empathize with things not being done the way you'd like to be, but the claim that things happening on the GHC tracker are done "in private" is silly. The gitlab tracker is 10x more accessible, and the lack of community engagement on the mailing lists speaks volumes.

And besides, nobody wants to be on a mailing list anyway. It's a terrible experience with weird branching and no persistence, and while there are archives, it's an extremely unpleasant thing to try to spelunk through.

Best, Sandy

On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 8:52 AM Henning Thielemann mailto:lemming@henning-thielemann.de> wrote:

On Wed, 7 Jul 2021, Oleg Grenrus wrote:

> For example > > - https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/20044 https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/20044 ByteArray migration > from primitive to base > - https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/20027 https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/20027 Changing Show String > behavior > > Why they are discussed "in private", I thought libraries@ list is where > such changes should be discussed.

I think so, too, and I missed them as well. _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org mailto:Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org mailto:Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries