Breaking Changes and Long Term Support Haskell

[Jeremy]

Kim-Ee Yeoh wrote
> But as Henrik and Lennart have alluded to, what we have currently is
> friction between "half-baked idea, I'll fight against it" and "nice idea,
> this is the way to progress."
> 
> LTS, seen in this light, is a discussion-postponing move.
> 
> What's needed is a "let's agree to disagree and have a long, deep
> discussion to understand one another", not "let's agree to disagree.
> Here's
> software for you. And here's software for me. Bye-bye."

Indeed, LTS is only relevant after a proposal has been agreed upon in
principle, and the only issue is whether it's worth a breaking change. AMP
may be a good example of where this would help.



--
View this message in context: http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/Monad-of-no-return-Proposal-MRP-Moving-return-out-of-Monad-tp5818567p5820476.html
Sent from the Haskell - Libraries mailing list archive at Nabble.com.