Infrastructure & Communication

[Richard Eisenberg]

I think the general interplay between mailing lists / wiki pages / Trac issues that GHC uses works well. Specifically:

- Mailing list for routine communication.
- Trac tickets / Git issues / Phab something-or-other for discussion on a specific proposal.
- Wiki page to present a specific proposal.

Wiki pages and tickets are therefore often linked together, and sometimes a conversation has to move from the mailing list to a ticket (though rarely the other way around).

I specifically vote against using the mailing list to debate well-defined issues that need to be resolved, as it's far too easy to lose signal in the noise and hard to see the thread all in one place.

I'm personally agnostic about the decision between Trac/Github/Phab.

Richard

On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:17 AM, Mario Blažević <blamario at ciktel.net> wrote:

> On 04/29/2016 07:15 AM, Francesco Ariis wrote:
>> Hello,
>>     personally I would be more likely to read/participate in the
>> discussions if such discussions were hosted here or on Trac rather
>> than Github.
> 
>    There are two or three distinct components we need to keep track of: the draft standard, discussions, and potentially RFCs.
> 
>    Discussions can be hosted on this mailing list, on Trac, or as Git issues. Each of them would serve fine, but we should choose exactly one and stick to it. The mailing list looks pretty good in isolation, but the best choice depends on whether we want to have RFCs or not.
> 
>    If we support Requests for Comments, we'll need to also support their public submissions and Git pull requests or something to the same effect. In that case, at least the inevitable comments on RFCs would best be placed close to the RFCs themselves - if the RFCs end up on GitHub the discussions of them should be kept as GitHub issues.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime