[ghc-steering-committee] Do we consider the GHC API in scope?

[Ben Gamari]

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

> Hi,
>
> in https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/108 David
> proposed changes to the plugin API. The propsosal is still under
> discussion (so if you want to comment, do it there), but more
> generally, I wonder:
>
> Is the GHC API (including the one for plugins) in scope for the GHC
> steering committee?
>
I'm very much on the fence about this, despite being the one who
initially referred the issue. It's not clear to me that making interface
decisions about the GhcPlugins or GHC modules is a task well-suited to a
committee.

Regardless, I think having a relatively high-visibility place to discuss
changes like the plugins proposal is quite helpful. So, even if we
decide that the API is out-of-scope for the committee, I think it may
still be helpful to use the proposal forum to solicit community
feedback. While in principle this discussion could happen just as easily
on Trac, my impression is that GitHub has been a bit more effective in
collecting a wide range of input.

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/20180205/e98a5b50/attachment.sig>