[ghc-steering-committee] GHC steering committee status

[Simon Peyton Jones]

>
> One disadvantage of the spreadsheet is that it's not as transparent as the
> other mechanisms we use for this committee (email and github). It should
> probably be visible to all and linked from the docs on github?
>

I wasn't really suggesting that a committee member can say absolutely
nothing, and simply update the spreadsheet with their vote; rather, they
should say (as now, by email) "I support" or "I am lukewarm but will not
stand in the way" or "I don't like this" -- or (new) "I recuse myself".
But in addition take 30s to record that result in the spreadsheet.

In short, zero impact on transparency.  All I'm after is a way to see the
status quo on one page, rather than by composing a zillion deltas.

Simon


On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 10:48, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 10:46, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think Simon intends the spreadsheet to be the source of truth for votes
>> by committee members, because he wanted something more explicit than just
>> silence to indicate "I have no strong views on this proposal". FWIW I think
>> it's reasonable to expect *some* action by committee members for each
>> proposal. I'm not wildly enthusiastic about the spreadsheet because it's
>> another thing separate from github and email, and it's a bit manual for my
>> liking, but happy to go with it if that's what people want.
>>
>> One disadvantage of the spreadsheet is that it's not as transparent as
>> the other mechanisms we use for this committee (email and It should
>> probably be visible to all and linked from the docs on github?
>>
>
> That should have read:
>
> One disadvantage of the spreadsheet is that it's not as transparent as the
> other mechanisms we use for this committee (email and github). It should
> probably be visible to all and linked from the docs on github?
>
>
>>
>> Cheers
>> Simon
>>
>> On Sun, 10 Sept 2023 at 03:36, Moritz Angermann <
>> moritz.angermann at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Simon,
>>>
>>> I think this is a good idea!  Is my understanding correct that this is
>>> for record keeping by the shepherd only? It is not sufficient for steering
>>> committee members to go over the proposal and just fill out
>>> accept/reject/recuse in their respective column? Emails are still the
>>> authorative events?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>   Moritz
>>>
>>> On Sun, 10 Sep 2023 at 10:07 AM, Simon Peyton Jones <
>>> simon.peytonjones at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear GHC steering committee
>>>>
>>>> Re GHC proposals I was talking to Simon M about
>>>>
>>>>    - Making the shepherd's job easier and quicker
>>>>    - Providing a way for members of the committee to say (explicitly)
>>>>    "I don't have an opinion about this proposal" and thus recuse themselves.
>>>>    Explicit recusal is better than "silence means assent" because silence can,
>>>>    and often does, mean "I'm under water and not listening".
>>>>
>>>> With that in mind, I want to revive my suggestion of running an online
>>>> spreadsheet
>>>> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e6GdwHmAjeDEUhTvP-b18MDkpTfH3SMHhFu5F3nDIWc/edit?usp=sharing>to
>>>> describe the state of proposals that are in our active purview.  That is,
>>>> I'm not proposing to show proposals that are under discussion by the
>>>> community, or accepted etc -- just the ones that are in our inbox, *where
>>>> the next action is ours.*
>>>>
>>>> That makes it much easier to see our current inbox, without looking
>>>> back for Jocahim's last email and then adding deltas for all the emails
>>>> since -- which I cannot do in my head.
>>>>
>>>> Specifically, I have *a column for each committee member's vote. *
>>>> That should make it easy for the shepherd to see who is yet to express an
>>>> opinion, which I always find difficult.
>>>>
>>>> As I say above, I am very uncomfortable with "silence means assent" for
>>>> any but the smallest proposals.  *I suggest instead that if there is a
>>>> proposal where you feel unable to offer an opinion, due to lack of
>>>> expertise, or lack of time, you can say "recuse" meaning that you
>>>> explicitly want to stand down from this particular proposal.*
>>>> (Somehow "abstain" carries a connotation of conflict of interest or
>>>> something, but it amounts to the same thing.)  If you are too  under water
>>>> to even recuse yourself, maybe it's time to step down.
>>>>
>>>> So in columns F to O we should see explicit responses from every
>>>> committee member, in a timely way.
>>>>
>>>> Joachim doesn't like spreadsheets like this because they can easily get
>>>> out of date.  But it must be better than manually trawling email. *And
>>>> it is up to each of us (not Joachim) to fill in our own column for
>>>> proposals in our inbox.*
>>>>
>>>> If we don't like it, we can change it.  You all have edit rights.
>>>>
>>>> I have populated it with data from Joachim's message of 2 Sept, but
>>>> there has been some action since then, so shepherds please update it.  This
>>>> is not Joachim's task!
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20230911/efe66d7f/attachment.html>