Am So., 12. Jan. 2020 um 09:32 Uhr schrieb George Wilson
According to this [table], bytestring is a boot library, so by reason 3 listed in [libraries], I believe bytestring already comes under the CLC. In that case, the latter page should be updated.
Thanks George, that's an interesting perspective! Edward, as the CLC Chair, can you confirm that the CLC in fact maintains the bytestring library, or clarify what the status of bytestring in the core libraries is?
[...] I too am interested in whether Duncan and Herbert would find another maintainer helpful.
In a brief private email exchange Herbert mentioned that due to bytestring's critical importance to the ecosystem, Duncan and him don't want others to make important decisions on bytestring or take care of the release management. I think that's rather understandable. IMHO these requirements should be compatible with some kind of "co-maintainer" role – I have a similar arrangement with Heinrich Apfelmus regarding the maintenance of threepenny-gui. Here's a sketch of what I imagine such a co-maintainer arrangement could look like in bytestring: * A co-maintainer cannot upload to Hackage, leaving that to Duncan or Herbert. * A co-maintainer can merge non-breaking changes – after waiting for a certain feedback period in the case of user-facing changes. * A co-maintainer can also help prepare breaking changes and other important decisions, but would have to leave the final decision to Duncan, Herbert and, as necessary, the CLC. IMHO such an arrangement could greatly improve the current situation, and hopefully allow Herbert and Duncan to focus on the most important decisions, where their expertise is needed the most. Herbert, Duncan, what do you think about this idea of a adding a "co-maintainer"? Would you require any changes to the arrangement to make it work for you? Of course, we still need to find one or more good candidates for the role – is anyone interested? Cheers, Simon