changes to library interfaces

[Robert Marlow]

Just a quick suggestion. My experience is that Formal consensus works
very well in situations where informal consensus (what you guys seem to
be currently using) isn't powerful enough. I've found this resource to
be a good one: http://www.consensus.net/ocaccontents.html

Many larger organisations use such formal mechanisms to achieve swift
consensus and avoid brute majoritarian democracy or "benevolent" (if
you're lucky!) dictators. If people are interested, I'd be happy to
share my understanding of the matter and help facilitate such a system.


On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 12:16 +0100, Ross Paterson wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 12:50:14PM +1000, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
> > Getting bogged down in fiddly details will just derail this effort. See
> > here. Perfectionists will not be tolerated! ;)
> >     http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Protect_the_community
> > [...]

> I don't care much about this particular case, but we really need a better
> way of handling interface changes than this.  We don't want proposals to
> rot, but changes to basic interfaces also need thorough consideration.
> At present, unless a proposal meets with a chorus of approval, the
> only way to get a decision is from SimonM or unilateral action by some
> committer.  That needs to change, I think.
-- 
Robert Marlow <bobstopper at bobturf.org>