Breaking Changes and Long Term Support Haskell

[Kim-Ee Yeoh]

Hi Simon,

I'd just like you to know that the Haskell 98 report, for which you served
as co-editor, played a very important role when I was teaching myself the
language.

In fact, I still refer to it from time to time, both in the language and
also the libraries section.

Which brings me to your email earlier this month:

https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-prime/2015-October/003984.html

I think that keeping the CLC and HPC separate has a lot of advantages. Most
important of all is keeping the work tractable by fanning it out. And the
track record speaks for itself: progress is made.

While it made plenty of sense the last time round when it felt like
squeezing blood from a stone assembling a quorum for HPC, wouldn't you say
it's different this time around?

There's a buzz of enthusiasm in HPC self-nominations that signals a very
healthy community, yes?

Some of that enthusiasm spills over into issues concerning the standard
libraries.

Now given that FTP is a done deal, wouldn't you say that it deserves to be
canonized in a report too? Just like Haskell 98?

I'm not saying to do away with the walls that separate the CLC and HPC. I'm
saying that today presents a rare opportunity for a unified committee to
work at a report good for the next 20 years.

Wouldn't it be such a waste to lose the moment?



*Precisely* the same issues will arise whether it's CLC or HPC.  And the
> HPC is going to be jolly busy with language issues.




-- Kim-Ee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20151021/12a83cb5/attachment.html>