[ghc-steering-committee] #392: Clarify modifiers design principle (recommendation: acceptance)

[Spiwack, Arnaud]

Yes, I believe that Richard and I are in agreement now. I don't think all
the conclusions have been added to the proposal yet, though; but whatever's
left, it's fairly minor.

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 1:29 PM Alejandro Serrano Mena <trupill at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear all,
> This discussion has been dormant for some time, but it’s time to revive it!
>
> Richard, Arnaud, did you manage to reach conclusion about the modification
> to the proposal?
>
> Apart from that, is there any other concern about the proposal? As I said
> in my original message, this is a very small amendment to an
> already-existing proposal, so if we accepted the previous one I see no
> problem in this one. I’ll wait until Richard and Arnaud get back on the
> issue, and then assume that silence for a week is acceptance.
>
> Regards,
> Alejandro
>
> El 11 jun 2021 14:55:41, Spiwack, Arnaud <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io>
> escribió:
>
>> I think that my discussion with Richard has come to a conclusion (it
>> should incur a small modification to the proposal).
>>
>> It is a very small (amendment to a) proposal, let's find a consensus on
>> this one quickly.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:26 AM Spiwack, Arnaud <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've commented on the PR [
>>> https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/392#pullrequestreview-657652189
>>> ] the changes on the syntax of lambda expressions are not motivated at all,
>>> I think at the very least there should be a discussion in the Alternatives
>>> section.
>>>
>>> But mostly, I'm worried about the implications/interactions that these
>>> changes have with linear types.
>>>
>>> (I'll be off for the rest of the week starting tonight, so I'll be back
>>> on this conversation on Monday, most likely)
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:10 AM Alejandro Serrano Mena <
>>> trupill at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Committee,
>>>> This proposal seems a natural extension of #370, covering some
>>>> additional cases (modifiers to classes and other declarations) that we’ve
>>>> found along the way. My recommendation is acceptance.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Alejandro
>>>>
>>>> On 4 May 2021 at 09:41:56, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Committe,
>>>>>
>>>>> Clarify modifiers design principle
>>>>> has been proposed by Richard
>>>>> https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/392
>>>>>
>>>>> This is an amendmend to #370, see the PR description for links to diffs
>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I propose Alejandro as the shepherd, as he shepherded #370 before.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in
>>>>> https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Joachim
>>>>> --
>>>>> --
>>>>> Joachim Breitner
>>>>>  mail at joachim-breitner.de
>>>>>  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
>>>>> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
>>>>>
>>>>> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20210628/5047dc47/attachment.html>