Proposal process status

[lonetiger at gmail.com]

+1 from me for keeping the two separate as well. While GHC may be the obviously prevalent Haskell compiler it is a far from the only one,
And I’d hate to have to look at a proposal for adding an extension to GHC (which would be riddled with GHC specific implementation specifics) 
Rather than a clean specification.

Maybe I’m naïve but I also see the Haskell committees as doing more than just copy pasting what’s worked. But also evaluate how it can be done
Better. I can perfectly well see situations where the implementation in GHC ended up being less useful than It should be just because of 
Implementation quirks/difficulties in GHC. 

Cheers,
Tamar 

From: Richard Eisenberg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20160722/635fc82e/attachment.html>