[Haskell-cafe] Haskellers.com skills list moderation?

Michael Snoyman michael at snoyman.com
Thu Oct 21 16:18:25 EDT 2010

OK, after reviewing the list again, here's some more that are on the
chopping block, given the new outlook we've been establishing here.
Speak up if you want it saved:

Denotational design
Programming using Arrows
Transactional business applications development
Categorical Programming

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Michael Snoyman <michael at snoyman.com> wrote:
> In case anyway was worried, I *have* been following this thread, and
> purposely not sticking my nose in to see what people's opinions are.
> I've really appreciated the discussion; let me give my overall
> response to everything:
> It's good to remember that a user can always add whatever information
> they want to their self-description. The main reason for the skills
> list is so that employers and anyone else seeking Haskellers can
> easily get a list of people. As such, the skills should be something
> informative that people really want to search for.
> I'm pretty convinced that Mathematics as-is is a bad idea. I can't
> imagine *anyone* saying "I want a Haskeller who knows math" (maths for
> you Brits), it just doesn't say anything.
> We also need to make things much more explicit. "Cabal, packaging,
> build and distribution tools" really doesn't explain whether it means
> I can tweak Cabal, or if I can write a cabal file, or if I can build
> something that's on Hackage. The breakdown John Lato gave ("Cabal
> internals" and "Software packaging/distribution tools") sounds good to
> me.
> On this one you may call be biased, but I think keeping Happstack and
> Yesod on their own makes perfect sense. If I were an employer looking
> to hire someone to work on a project, I would be looking to see that
> they can use my tool of choice. Obviously we need to draw a line
> somewhere; putting up that you can use the failure package seems silly
> (I'm purposely picking on one of my own packages). But the web
> frameworks are entire ecosystems of their own, and I think it makes
> sense to keep them as-is.
> The issue of having to judge something in which I'm not an expert is
> definitely true. I don't have any experience with Attribute Grammar,
> for instance, and so feel ill-equipped to make a judgement on that.
> I'll trust the list on this, which seems to indicate leaving it in.
> I'll probably need to ask similar questions in the future.
> I also like the idea of dropping skills that everyone has. Algorithmic
> Problem Solving may very well fit in that category.
> Finally, the idea of a certification process is great. But I'm not
> going to do it ;).
> If I don't hear any major complaining in the next few hours, I'll
> implement what I've said above.
> Michael

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list