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

[Spiwack, Arnaud]

If we do come back to it, it's going to be stronger evidence that something
in that space is needed.

On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 10:26 AM Simon Peyton Jones <
simon.peytonjones at gmail.com> wrote:

> As you say, it's not that big a deal.  I'm content to reject for now.  I'm
> sure we'll keep coming back to it!
>
> Simon
>
> On Sun, 2 Oct 2022 at 13:03, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am Dienstag, dem 20.09.2022 um 15:43 +0200 schrieb Joachim Breitner:
>> > So given that we don’t have a consensus, I suggest to not spend more
>> > time on it, let’s reject it (and remember where it is to be revived, if
>> > and when the problem becomes more clearer visible).
>>
>> no complaints about this either? I’ll mark it as rejected in a few days
>> unless someone shouts.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> 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/20221003/e5f92ec6/attachment.html>