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

[Alejandro Serrano Mena]

Richard, will you take care of making those small changes to the proposal?
That way we could mark this as accepted.

Regards,
Alejandro

El 28 jun 2021 9:01:28, Spiwack, Arnaud <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io> escribió:

> 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/20210628/3a2ef067/attachment.html>