[ghc-steering-committee] GHC 2020
Iavor Diatchki
iavor.diatchki at gmail.com
Tue Sep 29 16:38:07 UTC 2020
Thanks Alejandro. My preference would be that you share whatever you come
up with the list so we can discuss it, before making a proposal that would
represent the committee.
-Iavor
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 9:07 AM Simon Peyton Jones via
ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org> wrote:
> OK by me. Thank you
>
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> *From:* ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee-bounces at haskell.org>
> *On Behalf Of *Alejandro Serrano Mena
> *Sent:* 29 September 2020 15:51
> *To:* Richard Eisenberg <rae at richarde.dev>
> *Cc:* ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> *Subject:* Re: [ghc-steering-committee] GHC 2020
>
>
>
> I am still happy to drive this! I was not sure about whether we agreed as
> a Committee on pushing this.
>
>
>
> To make this more actionable, my goal is, *during next Sunday*, to create
> a new proposal with the *criteria* (based on Richard + Simon's list), and
> a preliminary assessment of which of the *current extensions* satisfy
> these criteria, and for those we might be willing to grant *exceptions*.
>
>
>
> Please raise your voice if you think we should proceed otherwise (or if
> you think we should not proceed at all!).
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Alejandro
>
>
>
> El mar., 29 sept. 2020 a las 16:29, Richard Eisenberg (<rae at richarde.dev>)
> escribió:
>
> What's the status of this push? I was delighted to see that Alejandro
> volunteered to be a motive force on this idea, and have thus refrained (as
> I am pushing on other ideas, too). But I also don't want this to die. :)
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> On Sep 17, 2020, at 11:39 AM, Alejandro Serrano Mena <trupill at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> I agree with using the criteria that Richard posted + the addition by
> Simon. Just in case somebody hadn't looked at the wiki, the criteria would
> be:
>
> 1. The extension is (mostly) conservative: All programs that were
> accepted without the extension remain accepted, and with the same meaning.
> 2. New failure modes that become possible with the extension are rare
> and/or easy to diagnose. (These failure modes include new error messages,
> wrong inferred types, and runtime errors, for example.)
> 3. The extensions complement the design of standard Haskell. (This one
> seems the most subjective.)
> 4. The extension has been -- and can reasonably be predicted to remain
> -- stable.
> 5. The extension is not to gate-keep an advanced or potentially-unsafe
> feature.
> 6. The extension is widely-used.
>
> For example, should we add to (6) "in current developments"? What about
> things like "EmptyDataDecls", which are just straightforward
> generalizations of what Haskell 2010 already allows, although in practice
> the only data type you would ever need to be empty is "Void"?
>
>
>
> Alejandro
>
>
>
> El jue., 17 sept. 2020 a las 16:42, Simon Marlow (<marlowsd at gmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> I think there should be some requirement that an extension be widely-used
> (for some suitable definition of that), before we ratify it in GHC2020.
> Some of the extensions that made it past the first round of filtering are
> not widely-used, and would be therefore probably be controversial additions
> to a language standard - e.g. ViewPatterns, ParallelListComp, RecursiveDo
> to name a few that I noticed straight off. I think it's a good idea to be
> conservative here.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 10:29, Spiwack, Arnaud <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io>
> wrote:
>
> There seems to be some question about who should drive this debate. But
> there is something we all seem to agree on: it is our role, as the steering
> committee, to announce the criteria by which we intend to judge the
> reasonableness of each potential candidate extension.
>
>
>
> So, let me suggest that we start discussing that, and move back to how
> this discussion ought to be driven when we are a bit clearer on the
> criteria.
>
>
>
> Richard wrote a bunch of criteria in the wiki page upthread [1]. I think
> that they are worthy of discussion. So let me ask the question: do we agree
> with all these criteria? do we want to add more?
>
>
>
> [1]: https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/wiki/GHC2020
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fghc-proposals%2Fghc-proposals%2Fwiki%2FGHC2020&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634558661&sdata=8ZlvyXrW6%2Bj2GdlPu6pIOOfbrV%2FdtLNdi8LyaTewKZA%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 12:17 PM Alejandro Serrano Mena <trupill at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I would rather make the process Committee-driven, because otherwise it may
> derail into too many micro-discussions. I think it's better to start a
> conversation saying "this is our proposal, here are our criteria, here are
> the exceptions we want to make", and then discuss from there.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Alejandro
>
>
>
>
>
> El mar., 8 sept. 2020 a las 14:01, Eric Seidel (<eric at seidel.io>)
> escribió:
>
> I think we may want to have the Committee initiate and drive the process.
> I think a GHC20XX proposal will turn into a bunch of micro proposals and
> discussions about individual (groups of) extensions, and it will be hard to
> track all of the threads of discussion in a single GitHub thread. We’ve
> dealt with long and contentious discussions before, but they were much more
> focused than GHC20XX will be, by design.
>
>
>
> I suggested earlier that an alternative strategy could be to open a new
> repo where the community can collaborate on GHC20XX via a familiar PR-based
> process, with each proposed group of extensions getting its own PR and
> discussion. There are a few open questions here though. When/how do we
> decide that it’s time for a new standard? How do we decide when the full
> proposal is ready for review? Do we need to review and sign off on each
> group of extensions separately or only the final product?
>
>
>
> This process would be a lot more work for us, so I’m happy to try the
> usual process first, and I’ll be happy to be proved wrong. But we should be
> prepared to step in and add some more structure if needed.
>
>
>
> Regardless, the first step should be to update our docs to express
> interest in GHC20XX proposals, establish criteria for including language
> extensions, and outline a process for submitting them.
>
>
>
> Eric
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2020, at 06:37, Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Personally I don’t think we should make the Steering Committee responsible
> for initiating or driving this. We should
>
> · establish the criteria (including some idea of how frequently
> we’d be open to creating a new GHCxx version),
>
> · express open-ness to a proposal, and then
>
> · review proposals when/if they materialise.
>
>
>
> It’d be fine for Alejandro, as an individual, to be a proposer. But that’s
> different from making the committee *responsible*.
>
>
>
> What do others think?
>
>
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> *From:* Alejandro Serrano Mena <trupill at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* 08 September 2020 09:13
> *To:* Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>
> *Cc:* Richard Eisenberg <rae at richarde.dev>; Eric Seidel <eric at seidel.io>;
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> *Subject:* Re: [ghc-steering-committee] GHC 2020
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I would really like to move this forward, and I would be happy to put some
> work on it.
>
>
>
> What do you think of the following plan?
>
> - Create a ghc-proposal based on the (awesome) wiki page by Richard. I
> think the criteria in the wiki are quite nice. Explain that one of the
> goals is to encompass as many stable extensions as possible.
>
> - Reformat the list to make 3 tables: one for extensions which satisfy all
> 5 criteria, one for extensions we want to include even if they don't, and
> one for those which should be rejected in the light of those criteria.
>
>
>
> If the process works well, we could think about instaurating a
> yearly/bi-yearly/n-yearly process to create new -XGHC20XX versions.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Alejandro
>
>
>
> El lun., 7 sept. 2020 a las 17:32, Simon Peyton Jones via
> ghc-steering-committee (<ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org>) escribió:
>
> Just back from holiday. Some thoughts
>
> * I don’t think this mailing list is the best place for the
> discussion. Basically, it's a GHC Proposal, so someone (possibly
> a committee member, possibly not) should write a proposal,
> and we should put it through the process.
>
> * We should advertise the criteria, as Richard has done on the
> wiki page.
>
> * Any such proposal should be informed by data. Notably, extension usage
> in Hackage, or perhaps Stackage (since it's a bit more curated).
>
> * A proposer might also want to run a public poll, as an additional
> source of data
>
> * When it comes to the committee, we can (I guess) vote on individual
> extensions, rather than just accept/reject the whole thing.
>
> I am intrigued by the idea of using Kialo to coordinate discussion.
> Maybe it'd work better than GitHub? Are there other alternatives?
> But that's orthogonal to the GHC 2020 idea; let's not conflate them.
>
> Simon
>
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: ghc-steering-committee <ghc-steering-committee-
> | bounces at haskell.org> On Behalf Of Richard Eisenberg
> | Sent: 02 September 2020 14:57
> | To: Eric Seidel <eric at seidel.io>
> | Cc: ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> | Subject: Re: [ghc-steering-committee] GHC 2020
> |
> | It seems clear that my wiki idea isn't winning the day -- I never
> | really liked it either. I'd be fine with either Eric's or Joachim's
> | approaches. Maybe start with Joachim's approach and then use Eric's
> | when Joachim's runs out of steam? A big minus, though, to Joachim's
> | approach is that it seems hard to get good community involvement.
> |
> | Richard
> |
> | > On Sep 2, 2020, at 8:11 AM, Eric Seidel <eric at seidel.io> wrote:
> | >
> | > Opening a regular discussion about whether and how we want to work on
> | GHC 2020 sounds fine, that will also give the community a place to
> | weigh in. I do think the eventual contents should be informed by the
> | community though, it shouldn’t just be us working alone.
> | >
> | > Sent from my iPhone
> | >
> | >> On Sep 2, 2020, at 03:16, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-
> | breitner.de
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fbreitner.de%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634568657&sdata=GGl8%2FgEX%2FUMSS1IAp5x11aht%2F%2B6xQY8%2Fqa37aySDtPc%3D&reserved=0>>
> wrote:
> | >>
> | >> Hi,
> | >>
> | >> sounds plausible. It would also allow us to use tags to easily
> | indicate
> | >> the status (e.g. clearly-not, definitely-yes, kinda-contested…), and
> | >> then filter by issue to get the current list…
> | >>
> | >> But before we go there, shouldn’t we maybe have a discussion first
> | on
> | >>
> | >> * do we even want that?
> | >> * what are the abstract criteria (or guidelines)?
> | >> * what is the process?
> | >>
> | >> I believe that discussion could be done like any other proposal.
> | >>
> | >>
> | >> As for the process; when I brought up the idea, I was worried about
> | us
> | >> spending huge resources discussion individual extensions to death,
> | and
> | >> proposed, in the interest of efficiency and getting things done:
> | >>
> | >>> The process could be: Every member can nominate any number of
> | >>> extensions, to include, maybe a small rationale and then we do one
> | >>> round of independent approval voting, requiring a supermajority to
> | >>> really only pick uncontested extensions.
> | >>
> | >> So instead of long debates, we start with GHC2020 being just those
> | >> extensions that a supermajority on the committee considers to be ok.
> | >>
> | >> This is much more lightweight process that we could get done in a
> | week
> | >> or two (maybe using a doodle-like voting page). Maybe we would leave
> | >> out one or two extension that initially people are reserved about,
> | but
> | >> could be swayed after lengthy discussions. But is that worth the
> | >> lengthy discussion?
> | >>
> | >> cheers,
> | >> Joachim
> | >>
> | >> --
> | >> Joachim Breitner
> | >> mail at joachim-breitner.de
> | >>
> | https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jo
> | achim-
> | breitner.de
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fbreitner.de%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634568657&sdata=GGl8%2FgEX%2FUMSS1IAp5x11aht%2F%2B6xQY8%2Fqa37aySDtPc%3D&reserved=0>
> %2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40microsoft.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634578651&sdata=yhLtqXE3QsviB6UGtcJmag7Hp1MMBc7YzV0NgOUL6io%3D&reserved=0>
> %7Cfa6e3a6bcdf
> | 04ed5611208d84f480f21%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C6373
> | 46518199468575&sdata=ABgJCFijwzYszRybc0kReMPdR7oSLzC1nV1xJYSlxQ0%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.
> | haskell.org
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fhaskell.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634578651&sdata=3ksDaGjTZCq%2BE2tBzPqrjoQ9LQ3ikh3RUNgZsaAe9B4%3D&reserved=0>
> %2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-
> | committee&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40microsoft.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634588643&sdata=Q89KmMJ87VLBBWVdemnhkZSEPtLvt6K8mp5ZNFihrnQ%3D&reserved=0>
> %7Cfa6e3a6bcdf04ed5
> | 611208d84f480f21%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637346518
> | 199468575&sdata=H1hFiX8qnuf%2FlYeNXfEE5j5Aik3dlVvsujoHOt%2FHTnw%3D&
> | amp;reserved=0
> | >
> | > _______________________________________________
> | > ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> | > ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> | >
> | https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.
> | haskell.org
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fhaskell.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634588643&sdata=smlu8yLG%2FwgNoYFMv%2F3QnyHhqDMSvOjZk5e%2FtxLznKc%3D&reserved=0>
> %2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-
> | committee&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40microsoft.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634598642&sdata=mhXHnOFn4tKiYZy6h5WkpnGm4Hk5KFiDZYnUAdk5oZo%3D&reserved=0>
> %7Cfa6e3a6bcdf04ed5
> | 611208d84f480f21%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637346518
> | 199468575&sdata=H1hFiX8qnuf%2FlYeNXfEE5j5Aik3dlVvsujoHOt%2FHTnw%3D&
> | amp;reserved=0
> |
> | _______________________________________________
> | ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> | ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> | https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.
> | haskell.org
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fhaskell.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634608636&sdata=vyTjG7qSxDYx1SiUjMLoIcbGlZA0IWD%2B7cbqKDW0Rhs%3D&reserved=0>
> %2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-
> | committee&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40microsoft.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634608636&sdata=MBlt7msCwwJRG6UAowr8NcARtLSO2rWiDdqF3lmSzjg%3D&reserved=0>
> %7Cfa6e3a6bcdf04ed5
> | 611208d84f480f21%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637346518
> | 199468575&sdata=H1hFiX8qnuf%2FlYeNXfEE5j5Aik3dlVvsujoHOt%2FHTnw%3D&
> | amp;reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-committee&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634618629&sdata=VYF4w3uxxlh1%2Bxz%2B5zwXXRSjZpfh1ifAnxm0Qz1DLLc%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
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-committee&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634618629&sdata=VYF4w3uxxlh1%2Bxz%2B5zwXXRSjZpfh1ifAnxm0Qz1DLLc%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
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-committee&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634628621&sdata=vnuBB%2FuVonv5m0u%2FYYrHzoTmwNtQV4QLwTHMVD6YK9c%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
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-committee&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634628621&sdata=vnuBB%2FuVonv5m0u%2FYYrHzoTmwNtQV4QLwTHMVD6YK9c%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
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-steering-committee&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cf5ac3d83a2294463146608d864875f01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637369880634628621&sdata=vnuBB%2FuVonv5m0u%2FYYrHzoTmwNtQV4QLwTHMVD6YK9c%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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20200929/85460984/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the ghc-steering-committee
mailing list