Kim-Ee Yeoh wrote
But as Henrik and Lennart have alluded to, what we have currently is friction between "half-baked idea, I'll fight against it" and "nice idea, this is the way to progress."
LTS, seen in this light, is a discussion-postponing move.
What's needed is a "let's agree to disagree and have a long, deep discussion to understand one another", not "let's agree to disagree. Here's software for you. And here's software for me. Bye-bye."
Indeed, LTS is only relevant after a proposal has been agreed upon in principle, and the only issue is whether it's worth a breaking change. AMP may be a good example of where this would help. -- View this message in context: http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/Monad-of-no-return-Proposal-MRP-Moving-... Sent from the Haskell - Libraries mailing list archive at Nabble.com.