[ghc-steering-committee] Status

[Joachim Breitner]

Hi,

Am Mittwoch, den 22.05.2019, 19:28 +0200 schrieb Richard Eisenberg:
> 
> 
> > On May 22, 2019, at 4:51 PM, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org> wrote:
> > 
> > It's hard for all of us to make time to review proposals.  Seeking
> > more members would help with that, as well as keeping us open to
> > fresh people and ideas.
> > 
> > Are you thinking about simply having a bigger committee, or are
> > some of us about to rotate off?

Some of us have become less involved recently, so I expect some
voluntary off-rotation once it is clear that there are capable
candidates to fill the spots. I don’t think we need to extend the
commitee, but the shepherding process means that less active members
slow things down.


> I wonder if we should think about having specific term limits on the
> committee (excepting, perhaps -- and at their permission -- the
> Simons).

The README says 

> Members have terms of 3, 4, and 5 years.

but this has never been acted upon.

>  Members could renominate themselves when their term expires. This
> would serve several functions:
> 
> - It's a forcing function to make sure we consider the possibility of
> new people on a regular basis.
> - A fixed term might incentivize individuals to work harder, given
> that the burden is time-limited. (Though a multi-year term doesn't
> feel very limited. To support this point, we might want to allow
> individuals to choose the length of their term, say an integer in the
> range 1-3, measured in years. There is theoretically a possibility of
> many people getting "in phase" and making high rollover, but we can
> just fix that if it happens.)
> - Right now, without terms, a member may feel awkward leaving, even
> if their interests have moved on somewhat. Term limits make a natural
> point at which to leave the table.
> - A member who wants to stay on past their term end (via self-
> renomination) will have an incentive to be responsive.
> - Though I would be thrilled to have Joachim remain Secretary in
> perpetuity (our BSFL -- Benevolent Secretary For Life), perhaps we
> should extend this idea to the secretary position, to give Joachim a
> natural time to renew his commitment and stave off resentment. :)
> 
> Open question: if a member in good standing renominates themselves,
> do we still run an open nomination process? I tend to say "no", but
> that that opens two more questions: what is "good standing", and what
> if other members of the community want in? I don't have the answers
> here.

I am leaning against a more formal process here. We have people who
show very consistent and reliable interest over many years (thinking of
Iavor here, to just give one example). Others naturally have a phase of
high activity and then lose interest for whatever reason – but this
unlikely aligns with term limits.

So I’d be happy to keep playing it by ear, asking for new people when
we feel that we need new energy on the committee.

Cheers,
Joachim

BTW: I know my status mails have become slightly less often, but right
now I am happy to keep doing that job. That said: should at some point
in the future someone think “Joachim has become too distracted, and I
think I can do that job better” then please tell me that, I won’t be
offended (and, at that point in the future, likely happy to pass the
job on).


-- 
Joachim Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de
  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20190522/7f0ae12a/attachment.sig>