Reviving strict-concurrency

[Yitzchak Gale]

Gershom B wrote:
> Yitz — do you want to request maintainership of strict-concurrency
> so you can do the takeover yourself?

I was afraid you were going to say that. :) In my opinion this is
basic infrastructure, so the maintainer should be libraries.
In fact, it would have been in base to begin with if not for its
dependence on deepseq. And I would not be the greatest maintainer
for the library.

But if libraries refuses to take it and no one else wants it, I'll take
it for now. Better that than the current disastrous situation. If anyone
else wants to take it over at any time, I'll be happy to relinquish it,
subject to informal approval by libraries committee people.

Thanks,
Yitz