[Haskell-cafe] Haskell ecosystem improvements meta-propsal
Alan & Kim Zimmerman
alan.zimm at gmail.com
Wed Oct 14 06:42:42 UTC 2015
Here is another example of a language change RFC process
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:45 AM Mark Lentczner <mark.lentczner at gmail.com>
>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> wrote:
>>> I've dealt with the IETF RFC process and the Python PEP process, and
>>> both of them worked better than that.
>> While both those are good examples of mostly working organizations
>> shepherding foundational technical standard(s) along... there is one thing
>> more important than their processes: Their stance. Both organizations have
>> a very strong engineering discipline of keeping deployed things working
>> without change. I don't think it is enough to simply model their process.
> Well, until Python 3, anyway.
> My goal wasn't to recreate the engineering discipline that deployed things
> keep working without change as you upgrade the ecosystem, it's to provide a
> mechanism so the community can more easily engage with the evolution of the
> ecosystem. Hopefully this will make it easier for the community to move
> things forward in a desirable manner. But it's a process, and leaves the
> question of whether the desire is for more stability or a less stagnant
> language up to the users of the process.
> I don't necessarily want to model the IETF or PEP processes. Those are a
> starting point. I tried to abstract the initial points out enough that the
> final result could be either one of them, or something totally unrelated
> that's a better fit for the Haskell community.
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe