[ghc-steering-committee] Redid our documentation

[Ben Gamari]

Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de> writes:

> Hi Manuel,
>
> just to make sure I get what you are saying, are you suggesting this
> approach?
>
>  * (At least) one committee member, let’s call him the secretary,
>    promises to watch the GitHub repository close enough.
>  * When an author wants to bring a proposal before the committe, he
>    adds a comment to the a pull request, briefly summarizing the major 
>    points raised during the discussion period and stating their belief
>    that the proposal is ready for review..
>  * The secretary notices that, labels the proposal as
>    “Pending committee review” and notifies the committee.
>
> This would be slightly more convenient for the submitters, and slightly
> more work for the committee. But I guess it makes sense, and we can try
> this way.
>
> Simon already shoved me towards picking up the “secretary” hat, to
> reduce load on Ben. Ben, unless you protest, I’ll take over this role.
>
Yes, I think this sounds quite reasonable and I realize I've been
woefully remiss in this capacity. Despite a few attempts at trying to
get into a rhythm I've so far been unable to do so. I really appreciate
your stepping up, Joachim.

Cheers,

- Ben
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 487 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20170227/54081062/attachment.sig>