[ghc-steering-committee] Please review #372: The GHC20xx process, Shepherd: Simon PJ

[Joachim Breitner]

Dear Committee,

this is your secretary speaking:

Alejandro and I have drafted a process for GHC20xx
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/372
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/blob/ghc20xx-process/proposals/0000-ghc-extensions.rstI’ll propose Eric Seidel as the shepherd.b

I’ll propose Simon PJ as the shepherd, as this is a procedural
metaprocess that benefits from chair involvement.

This is mostly the outcome of discussions we already had, so I don’t
expect we need a lot of further discussion, and could maybe vote soon.
Note that there are two alternatives in “2.2 Process“. They differ in
the form the community is invited to be involved, and also in the
overall weight of the process. The main difference is

 Do we want to _encourage_ broad discussion of individual extensions 
 (the point of Alternative 2), because we believe it is useful and 
 healthy, or do we want to avoid stirring such discussions
 (Alternative 1), because we don’t believe they would add much, would
 be distracting and time consuming, and because there is enough
 existing signal (the poll, reddit, the PR comment section, …).

There are procedural differences that follow from that, e.g. using a
separate repository (Alternative 2) or using our existing one
(Alternative 1), but in a way the overall aim is the core of this
alternative.

Simon, once you think all interesting points have been raised (which
may already be the case) I suggest you call for a ranked vote with the
options “Reject”, “Alternative 1”, “Alternative 2”.


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