On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 13:02 +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
Specific comments:
"come to view on whether the package should be accepted" -> "help achieve a consensus ... "
We decided to clarify it slightly differently to make clear the distinction between forming a view and working with others to get a consensus. - * come to view on whether the package should be accepted, either as-is or with certain modifications + * come to a view on whether the package should be accepted, either as-is or with certain modifications + * work with other reviewers to try to achieve a consensus view
"the libraries mailing list reach consensus to accept it" -> "the reviewers reach a consensus to accept it" ?
Changed as you suggested. It's simpler and means the same thing since everyone one the libs mailing list is considered as a reviewer.
"Compile on all operating systems and compilers that the platform targets" -> ".. except where the package is compiler- or platform-specific" ?
We decided not to list explicit exceptions on this point but to make clear the "should" status of all the requirements: Every package should fulfil the following requirements. Any requirements that are not met must be clearly explained and justified in the proposal. So for a platform-specific package you have to point it out in the proposal, justify it and have the reviewers agree with you.
The "Interim Licesne Policy" should be one of the bullet points under Package Requirements. e.g.
"The package must be distributed under an acceptable license. The only license currently acceptable is BSD3 [rationale..]"
Added to the requirements list: * Be distributed under an acceptable copyright license. See the interim license policy. So the changes as a whole are: http://trac.haskell.org/haskell-platform/wiki/AddingPackages?action=diff&version=9&old_version=5 Duncan