How should we treat changes to the GHC API?

[Simon Peyton Jones]

A recent MR for GHC<https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/merge_requests/3758> (adding machinery for plugins to write data to extensible interface files) made me wonder:
how we should treat significant changes to the GHC API?
Changes to the GHC API, especially to bits used by plugins or by IDEs, are clearly user-visible to an important class of users - they are not just internal to GHC itself.   So, how should we review them?  Should they perhaps be part of the GHC proposals process?  Or some other similar process?   (The collection of experts on the GHC API, plugins, IDEs etc, is rather different to the membership of the GHC steering group.)
I'm asking, not to be obstructive, but because the GHC API deserves to be thought of as a whole; in the past it has grown incrementally, without much discussion, and that has not served us well.  But at the moment there is no process, no group to consult.
Any views?
Simon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20200727/de1da263/attachment.html>