New Github features and Haskell Prime

[Matthias Fischmann]

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:34:02AM -0400, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:34:02 -0400
> From: Richard Eisenberg <rae at cs.brynmawr.edu>
> To: Matthias Fischmann <mf at zerobuzz.net>
> Cc: Haskell-prime Mailing List <haskell-prime at haskell.org>
> Subject: Re: New Github features and Haskell Prime
>
>
> > On Sep 26, 2016, at 8:47 PM, Matthias Fischmann <mf at zerobuzz.net> wrote:
> >
> > i agree, and would like to propose an independent ratification
> > process.
>
> At the risk of sounding exclusionary, I wonder what the goal of defining the committee is if the larger community can vote on each proposal. As I understood it, the committee has voting rights, while the larger community has viewing and commentary rights.
>
> We *do* most certainly value wide input. But voting is quite sensitive. In particular, you recommend a threshold of 70% before something is accepted. 70% of what? Of votes? Who is eligible to vote? And how do we publicize a vote? When is it held? What if that period of time is a big holiday in some country? Etc. It all seems to be a can of worms.
>
> Richard


hi richard,

thanks for your reply.  i don't have a strong opinion and there may well be more productive uses of the committee's time, so i'm happy to drop idea.

just to be clarify for those who are still interested: i'm not suggesting we should *change* the process as much as *extend* it.  once the committee has finalized haskell-prime, ask everybody (literally everybody) for a boolean.

this gives the community a way to formally support the outcome in addition to people and process.  and the committee has an incentive to take community feedback serious.  (which, as a downside, also means it's distracting even before the finalized standard is out.)

anyway.  never mind.  (:

thanks,
matthias