[ghc-steering-committee] #195 recommendation: accept

[Simon Peyton Jones]

I'm rather curious of what made my email sound like I was suggesting immediate acceptance,
I just misinterpreted this: “This proposal seems well motivated. So, I'll count as an accept vote, when the details are eventually sorted out.”
I understood you to mean “Let’s accept the proposal, if enough people have an accept vote, and leave it to the authors to sort out the details later”.    But I obviously read too much into your words – apologies.

Simon


From: Spiwack, Arnaud <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io>
Sent: 06 November 2019 09:31
To: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>
Cc: Richard Eisenberg <rae at richarde.dev>; ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org>
Subject: Re: [ghc-steering-committee] #195 recommendation: accept


I don’t think we should formally accept proposals that are ill-specified, in the hope that they’ll subsequently be fixed up.  Pushing back to “please revise to address these points” is not a negative thing – it’s a positive thing, saying good proposal but let’s make it better.
For the record: I didn't imply otherwise (I was merely registering my acceptance provided details are filled out to the rest of the committee's satisfaction). I'm rather curious of what made my email sound like I was suggesting immediate acceptance, but I really don't want to derail this thread.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20191106/b95f9a96/attachment.html>