[ghc-steering-committee] Please review #517: Require implementors before proposal submission, Shepherd: Simon PJ

[Baldur Blöndal]

I agree with the sentiment that it is better to have a proposal that is
actually going to be implemented rather than just debated. It gives a sense
of seriousness to accepted GHC proposals. Acceptance should be understood
to mean it will eventually become part of GHC, and I think people already
understand it that way.
What I don't want is for this to deter anyone from suggesting ideas and
improvements; Simon's third bullet point assuaged my fear of that. New
ideas can be freely debated, and people can choose to focus on proposals
with an implementation plan. I suppose an author of a proposal can also
take on the responsibility to rally support for an implementation if they
are otherwise unable to produce one.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20220825/aa15c4cc/attachment.html>