proposal to have new proposals in new threads Re: rfc: include bimap into Data.Either

newer
Upper bounds in PVP WAS: Gearing...

Carter Schonwald

21 Apr 2014 21 Apr '14

11:41 a.m.

Hey all, if you agree that new proposals should be voted on in new/distinct threads (though can certainly be hammered out before hand), please chime in. This seems to come up a lot (at least in my naive following of the list) and if a new proposal appears in a thread you've already voted on, its hard to know curretly thoughts? On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256

On 20/04/14 23:37, Carter Schonwald wrote:

...
can the people with new proposals do new threads, adding ammendments inline to a preexisting thread makes it really hard

a) to know who supports what b) make it visible to folks who've started ignoring the thread they've already voted on +1 ;-)

- -- Alexander alexander@plaimi.net https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlNVB0wACgkQRtClrXBQc7UeSwEAqDC7LhAmeG2mNmSDQ9D33ulE +WIBcp4t66nD8H519XwA/jtSYbEZ+oq2DdtXIxAWDSeNDn53XyOiZdR4vpFCPzTm =cFB+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

Attachments:

attachment.html (text/html — 2.1 KB)

Show replies by date

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic

21 Apr 21 Apr

4:49 p.m.

On 22 April 2014 01:41, Carter Schonwald wrote:

...

Hey all, if you agree that new proposals should be voted on in new/distinct threads (though can certainly be hammered out before hand), please chime in. This seems to come up a lot (at least in my naive following of the list) and if a new proposal appears in a thread you've already voted on, its hard to know curretly

thoughts?

I suppose the problem then is we have n different threads with slightly varying proposals, no way to keep them in sync or to even track them all (especially if someone comes late to the party and misses the other threads). I'm on the fence about this. IIUC, this is what Google Wave would have been good for... The other alternative would be to have explicitly numbered alternate proposals and people would actually state which one they were voting for. But I don't see that working well either.

...

On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:

...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256

On 20/04/14 23:37, Carter Schonwald wrote:

...
can the people with new proposals do new threads, adding ammendments inline to a preexisting thread makes it really hard

a) to know who supports what b) make it visible to folks who've started ignoring the thread they've already voted on +1 ;-)

- -- Alexander alexander@plaimi.net https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlNVB0wACgkQRtClrXBQc7UeSwEAqDC7LhAmeG2mNmSDQ9D33ulE +WIBcp4t66nD8H519XwA/jtSYbEZ+oq2DdtXIxAWDSeNDn53XyOiZdR4vpFCPzTm =cFB+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

-- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic Ivan.Miljenovic@gmail.com http://IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com

Edward Kmett

5:03 p.m.

Utimately the libraries@ submission process is about achieving consensus as much as possible, rather than just up and down vote tallying. Needlessly fragmenting all discussion on a given topic into microscopically detailed threads makes it very difficult to follow the sweep of opinion. To that end I would encourage people to be clear about what parts of a given proposal you like or dislike rather than just say +1 or -1 without indicating why. This captures the essence of the library submissions process as we have it described below. http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Library_submissions -Edward On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Carter Schonwald < carter.schonwald@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hey all, if you agree that new proposals should be voted on in new/distinct threads (though can certainly be hammered out before hand), please chime in. This seems to come up a lot (at least in my naive following of the list) and if a new proposal appears in a thread you've already voted on, its hard to know curretly

thoughts?

On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:

...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256

On 20/04/14 23:37, Carter Schonwald wrote:

...
can the people with new proposals do new threads, adding ammendments inline to a preexisting thread makes it really hard

a) to know who supports what b) make it visible to folks who've started ignoring the thread they've already voted on +1 ;-)

- -- Alexander alexander@plaimi.net https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlNVB0wACgkQRtClrXBQc7UeSwEAqDC7LhAmeG2mNmSDQ9D33ulE +WIBcp4t66nD8H519XwA/jtSYbEZ+oq2DdtXIxAWDSeNDn53XyOiZdR4vpFCPzTm =cFB+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

Carter Schonwald

5:31 p.m.

that sounds good to me. so first a discussion on what is being proposed, then a vote subsquently? either way, the spirit of my suggestion is in alignment with what you're saying On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Edward Kmett wrote:

...

Utimately the libraries@ submission process is about achieving consensus as much as possible, rather than just up and down vote tallying. Needlessly fragmenting all discussion on a given topic into microscopically detailed threads makes it very difficult to follow the sweep of opinion. To that end I would encourage people to be clear about what parts of a given proposal you like or dislike rather than just say +1 or -1 without indicating why.

This captures the essence of the library submissions process as we have it described below.

http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Library_submissions

-Edward

On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Carter Schonwald < carter.schonwald@gmail.com> wrote:

...
Hey all, if you agree that new proposals should be voted on in new/distinct threads (though can certainly be hammered out before hand), please chime in. This seems to come up a lot (at least in my naive following of the list) and if a new proposal appears in a thread you've already voted on, its hard to know curretly

thoughts?

On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Alexander Berntsen
...
wrote:

...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256

On 20/04/14 23:37, Carter Schonwald wrote:

...
can the people with new proposals do new threads, adding ammendments inline to a preexisting thread makes it really hard

a) to know who supports what b) make it visible to folks who've started ignoring the thread they've already voted on +1 ;-)

- -- Alexander alexander@plaimi.net https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlNVB0wACgkQRtClrXBQc7UeSwEAqDC7LhAmeG2mNmSDQ9D33ulE +WIBcp4t66nD8H519XwA/jtSYbEZ+oq2DdtXIxAWDSeNDn53XyOiZdR4vpFCPzTm =cFB+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

Henning Thielemann

27 Apr 27 Apr

4:08 a.m.

New subject: proposal to have new proposals in new threads

Am 21.04.2014 23:03, schrieb Edward Kmett:

...

Utimately the libraries@ submission process is about achieving consensus as much as possible, rather than just up and down vote tallying.

Btw. I have read that it is easier to find a consensus by not counting up and down votes, but by only counting different grades of down-votes.

4043

Age (days ago)

4049

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

4 comments

4 participants

participants (4)

Carter Schonwald
Edward Kmett
Henning Thielemann
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic