[ghc-steering-committee] Please review #673: Amendment to -jsem proposal #540

[Eric Seidel]

Sorry for my absence folks. I've looked through the updates and think this is basically landing in a good place once the last comments from Sebastian and Simon are addressed.

On Fri, Nov 1, 2024, at 12:00, Sebastian Graf wrote:
> I'm in support as well, but would like to see the relationship to PVP 
> major bumps addressed.
>
>
> ------ Originalnachricht ------
> Von "Simon Peyton Jones" <simon.peytonjones at gmail.com>
> An "Adam Gundry" <adam at well-typed.com>
> Cc ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> Datum 29.10.2024 23:16:20
> Betreff Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Please review #673: Amendment to 
> -jsem proposal #540
>
>> I'm supportive.   I do not have a well-informed view, but the amendment is born from practical experience, so I am pretty sure it's an improvement.
>> 
>> I'd love a bit more detail in the proposal (I have commented in one place) but I might be off-target and would yield to others' advice, including that of the author.
>> 
>> Simon
>> 
>> On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 at 19:37, Adam Gundry <adam at well-typed.com> wrote:
>>> It seems Zubin updated the proposal to take account of Sebastian's 
>>> concerns, but then discussion has tailed off. Are we now in a position 
>>> to accept this proposal, or are there any remaining concerns?
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Adam
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 24/09/2024 07:44, Sebastian Graf wrote:
>>> > I think changes to the communication protocol *are* user-facing, in that 
>>> > any change to the protocol could implies a breaking change between all 
>>> > cabal releases in the future and all GHC releases in the past.
>>> > It appears that is the case for the planned release of 
>>> > `semaphore-compat-2`, but I'm not 100% sure.
>>> > 
>>> > In that light, I think it's good to discuss in a proposal to ensure we 
>>> > do not sign off lightly on such breaking changes, in particular for 
>>> > future versions of `semaphore-compat`.
>>> > 
>>> > I will express support once compatibility and breaking changes are 
>>> > properly addressed.
>>> > 
>>> > Sebastian
>>> > 
>>> > ------ Originalnachricht ------
>>> > Von "Arnaud Spiwack" <arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io 
>>> > <mailto:arnaud.spiwack at tweag.io>>
>>> > An "Simon Peyton Jones" <simon.peytonjones at gmail.com 
>>> > <mailto:simon.peytonjones at gmail.com>>
>>> > Cc ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org 
>>> > <mailto:ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org>
>>> > Datum 24.09.2024 04:17:17
>>> > Betreff Re: [ghc-steering-committee] Please review #673: Amendment to 
>>> > -jsem proposal #540
>>> > 
>>> >> Quite frankly, this is barely any user-facing change at all. 
>>> >> Technically the semaphore could previously be shared by non-Haskell 
>>> >> processes in ways the updated proposal doesn't allow. But it's not 
>>> >> really something people do. So it all sounds reasonable.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 19:10, Simon Peyton Jones 
>>> >> <simon.peytonjones at gmail.com <mailto:simon.peytonjones at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>     I'm happy to support too, but I would like to see presentational
>>> >>     changes, so the final proposal makes sense when read in 5 yrs time.
>>> >>
>>> >>     Simon
>>> >>
>>> >>     On Sat, 21 Sept 2024 at 20:45, Malte Ott <malte.ott at maralorn.de
>>> >>     <mailto:malte.ott at maralorn.de>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>         I agree.
>>> >>
>>> >>         On 2024-09-21 09:16, Eric Seidel wrote:
>>> >>         > Hi all,
>>> >>         >
>>> >>         > This seems like a sensible update to an accepted proposal.
>>> >>         >
>>> >>         > I recommend we accept the amendment.
>>> >>         >
>>> >>         > Eric
>>> >>         >
>>> >>         > On Thu, Sep 19, 2024, at 19:00, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
>>> >>         > > Hi all,
>>> >>         > >
>>> >>         > > This is minor updates to correct an existing approved
>>> >>         proposal.
>>> >>         > >
>>> >>         > > I approve of these changes.
>>> >>         > >
>>> >>         > > Erik
>>> >>         > >
>>> >>         > > Adam Gundry wrote:
>>> >>         > >
>>> >>         > >> Dear Committee,
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         > >> Zubin Duggal proposes to amend proposal #540, which
>>> >>         introduced the -jsem
>>> >>         > >> parallelism control mechanism, so that it can avoid
>>> >>         incompatibilities
>>> >>         > >> arising from different system C library implementations:
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         > >> https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/673
>>> >>         <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/673>
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         https://github.com/wz1000/ghc-proposals/blob/new-jsem/proposals/0540-jsem.rst <https://github.com/wz1000/ghc-proposals/blob/new-jsem/proposals/0540-jsem.rst>
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         > >> I'd like to nominate Eric Seidel as the shepherd, since
>>> >>         he was the
>>> >>         > >> shepherd of the original proposal.
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         > >> Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process>
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         > >> Cheers,
>>> >>         > >>
>>> >>         > >> Adam
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Adam Gundry, Haskell Consultant
>>> Well-Typed LLP, https://www.well-typed.com/
>>> 
>>> Registered in England & Wales, OC335890
>>> 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX, England
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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