[ghc-steering-committee] GHC 20xx process

[Eric Seidel]

Thanks Alejandro and Joachim for pushing this forward!

I also suggested a heavier process along the lines of (2) at some point, but after reading the proposal and Joachim's argument here, I feel comfortable with (1) as well.

Also, I think @AntC2 made a good point about -fglasgow-exts on the PR [1]. For the initial round it would be useful to list the extensions enabled by -fglasgow-exts as a reference point.

[1]: https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/372#issuecomment-716066900

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020, at 06:18, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee wrote:
> |  Is anyone not in favor of this proposal, or has questions, or shall we
> |  declare consensus and merge it?
> 
> In my message of 4 Nov, I asked for feedback within "a week or two".  
> Let's set a deadline of the end of this week.
> 
> All: please respond before then, if you want to.
> 
> I don't think this is terribly controversial, so I'll take silence as assent.
> 
> All this assuming we adopt Alternative 1.
> 
> Simon
> 
> |  -----Original Message-----
> |  From: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee-bounces at haskell.org> On
> |  Behalf Of Joachim Breitner
> |  Sent: 09 November 2020 16:28
> |  To: ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> |  Subject: Re: [ghc-steering-committee] GHC 20xx process
> |  
> |  Hi,
> |  
> |  Am Freitag, den 06.11.2020, 19:55 +0000 schrieb Richard Eisenberg:
> |  > This is an effective argument; you've changed my mind.
> |  >
> |  > I'm now in favor of Joachim's simpler process.
> |  
> |  thanks, also for making me get more clarity on this as well.
> |  
> |  Is anyone still preferring Alternative 2, or should we take it off the
> |  table?
> |  
> |  Is anyone not in favor of this proposal, or has questions, or shall we
> |  declare consensus and merge it?
> |  
> |  
> |  It seems that now is a good time to then actually do the first iteration of
> |  the process – the State of Haskell survey data, once out, will be fresh, and
> |  we'd be well in time for inclusion in the Spring release of GHC, likely 9.1
> |  (unless the 9.0 delay shifts things around… oh well, let’s just make sure we
> |  have GHC2021 defined before or near the start of 2021, not late in that year
> |  :-))
> |  
> |  Cheers,
> |  Joachim
> |  
> |  --
> |  Joachim Breitner
> |    mail at joachim-breitner.de
> |  
> |  https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.joachim
> |  -
> |  breitner.de%2F&data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C125f812494db4225
> |  0f4808d884cc8403%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C63740536191896
> |  4507%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1
> |  haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2BfuHY7eCNyF5QlP7BfXDrNjxgWhoj%2FGI92S
> |  esCy1gLA%3D&reserved=0
> |  
> |  
> |  _______________________________________________
> |  ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> |  ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> |  https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.haske
> |  ll.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-
> |  committee&data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C125f812494db42250f480
> |  8d884cc8403%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637405361918974502%
> |  7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwi
> |  LCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=TyxdMqz%2FXFY9WYgZKdUHkFSQEvqRMJdoVEajh39JNs
> |  A%3D&reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>