Report merged, steps to follow

[Carter Schonwald]

sounds good to me, we can always tweak stuff as needed

On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 10:04 AM Mario Blažević <blamario at ciktel.net> wrote:

> Four weeks having passed since the previous discussion with no
> objections, I have now merged the content of the Haskell Report
>
> from https://github.com/haskell/haskell-report
>
> into https://github.com/haskell/rfcs
>
>
>      To remind everybody again, the point of this move was to enable
> adding an actionable change to the report to every RFC. From this point
> on, any proposal that passes the full process to becoming accepted can
> update the report by the simple act of getting merged.
>
>      In order to test this process, over a year ago I've picked and
> submitted the least controversial RFC I could find, namely
> https://github.com/haskell/rfcs/pull/17. There has been no objection to
> the proposal. In fact there has been no comment whatsoever, but I
> suppose that's beside the point. So today I have moved the RFC to the
> "Last Call" column (https://github.com/haskell/rfcs/projects/1) as the
> first and only proposal to gain that awesome status.
>
>      It's not at all clear what should happen to the RFC between this
> point and it getting merged, but I'm determined to test drive the
> process with it. This is my plan:
>
> 1. I'm going to add update the report with a patch to the report
> content, then
>
> 2. wait another two weeks for any objection before
>
> 3. moving the proposal from the Last Call to the Ready for Report
> status, then
>
> 4. announce that the proposal is Ready for Report and
>
> 5. wait another two weeks for the full approval, then finally
>
> 6. merge the RFC.
>
>
>      The only flaw in my cunning plan above is defining what constitutes
> "the full approval". The committee being rather ... disengaged and
> scattered, there is little hope of getting 50% of votes from all its
> members. The criteria of no raised objection, which I've used so far,
> seems much too lax for a full approval. I think the only reasonable fair
> criteria of success would be a public and unanimous approval by at least
> N committee members. I have no idea what N should be, but I know that if
> this test proposal can't garner N approvals, no proposal will ever pass
> the hurdle.
>
>      To make it plain, I suggest we take the number of committee members
> that comment on the test proposal as the maximum bound of N. I do hope
> max(N) > 1.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-prime/attachments/20181104/29e310e6/attachment.html>