LAST CALL to comment on the Applicative/Monad Proposal

[Mario Blažević]

On 2019-01-16 3:10 p.m., Oliver Charles wrote:
> Is there information anywhere on the process for acceptance/rejection 
> criteria. It sounds like hvr can outright reject any proposal - are 
> there others with that power? What is generally required for acceptance? 
> Not meant critically, just interested

	Every active member of the commitee has that power. We could 
contemplate a different approach, like voting, if all members of the 
commitee were active. When you have only a couple of responses to a 
proposal, consensus among those who respond is the only possible way to go.


> 
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019, 8:01 pm Mario Blažević <mblazevic at stilo.com 
> <mailto:mblazevic at stilo.com> wrote:
> 
>     A month passed since the last call, and I'm sorry to say that the
>     Applicative/Monad proposal has been rejected. Herbert has vetoed it on
>     the grounds that it doesn't come packaged with MonadFail and
>     MonadOfNoReturn proposals.
> 
>     This is very unfortunate because (I thought) there was finally a
>     glimmer
>     of hope for Haskell 2020. The new process used to complete the
>     RelaxedPolyRec proposal seemed promising, as it worked around the
>     commitee's letargy problem. As it turns out, that wasn't the only
>     problem.
> 
>     In all fairness, Herbert did state [1] he intends to write up the
>     combination of AMP, MFP, and MNRP the way he likes it. I do hope that
>     happens, but when and if he submits the combined proposal, I would not
>     be surprised if, for example, Philippa should veto it on the grounds
>     that it doesn't include the ApplicativeDo proposal that she's been
>     vocal
>     about. This committee is a far cry from the one that gave us Haskell
>     '98.
> 
>     A Haskell 2020 report with no AMP would be pointless, in my opinion, so
>     I'm going to suspend my work on the report until this issue is
>     resolved.
>     I still think the best course of action may be to disband the current
>     disfunctional committee and form a new one, as I proposed [2] before
>     establishing the new process.
> 
>     [1] https://github.com/haskell/rfcs/pull/1#issuecomment-448126690
>     [2]
>     https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-prime/2018-October/004370.html
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Haskell-prime mailing list
>     Haskell-prime at haskell.org <mailto:Haskell-prime at haskell.org>
>     http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
> 


-- 
Mario Blazevic
mblazevic at stilo.com
Stilo International

This message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, copying, or
distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient(s) please contact the sender by reply email and destroy
all copies of the original message and any attachments.