Re: Why base library changes are only discussed on GHC issue tracker and not on the libraries@ list?
Hécate <[email protected]> Wed, 7 Jul 2021 22:52:16 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.haskell.libraries |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I would like also to address the fact that the CLC's communication efforts suffer from a lack of attention that undermines its legitimacy when decisions like the ByteArray relocation are taken. I understand it is the CLC's prerogative to undertake such changes, but this is typically the kind of thing that warrants an announcement, and I bet people on this list would have wanted to learn about it through official channels rather than in the middle of a recriminations thread. Being a good communicator is indeed part of the required qualities of a core maintainer¹, it is a shame that this situation is not taken care of. Best regards, Hécate ¹ https://wiki.haskell.org/Core_Libraries_Committee#Maintainer_qualities Le 07/07/2021 à 22:42, Hécate a écrit : > It is unfortunately true that whilst many excellent point of views > have been given on subjects discussed on this mailing-list (and I have > been lucky to benefit from them directly), it is also a terrible > platform for the kind of feedback that most need when interacting with > the CLC. > I know it's complicated for the committee members to express an > opinion publicly without the weight of their status. > > Regarding "controversial" proposals, I fear that the definition of the > term according to the Wiki page is a bit too broad, and I think that > we would benefit from a clarification regarding the process so that it > depends less on bikeshedding as the main source of feedback for Core > Libraries changes. > > I believe we have an invaluable source of knowledge in this > mailing-list, but that it is not suited for some discussions that are > being held here. The format of this mailing-list proves to be > extremely painful and demotivating for people who wish to improve the > status quo, and it is hard to make relevant comments without direct > access to the patch so that conversations can revolve around the code. > > > Le 07/07/2021 à 20:23, Andrew Lelechenko a écrit : >> To put it blunt, libraries mail list has a reputation of a place, >> where things are never got done. Using it for any meaningful >> discussion is an obsolete practice and is actually less inclusive >> than relevant issue trackers. >> >> I suggest we use libraries mail list to announce (controversial) >> proposals, but rely on other, more suitable media to discuss them. >> >> Best regards, >> Andrew >> >>> Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 18:11:41 +0300 >>> From: Oleg Grenrus <[email protected]> >>> >>> For example >>> >>> - https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/20044 ByteArray migration >>> from primitive to base >>> - 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. >>> >>> - Oleg >> _______________________________________________ >> Libraries mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries > -- Hécate ✨ 🐦: @TechnoEmpress IRC: Hecate WWW: https://glitchbra.in RUN: BSD _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries