Proposal: Expanding the CLC

[Gershom B]

I tend to agree. The CLC is a deliberative body with some action components. (The name “committee” is a tell). One wants those smaller to reach consensus sooner. Having more maintainers for “core” and “near-core” packages (and perhaps formalizing more the latter) is very good. Asking these maintainers be on the CLC doesn’t seem to be necessary to solve any proximate problem?

-g

On Feb 17, 2021, 5:47 AM -0500, Alexey Khudaykov <alexey.skladnoy at gmail.com>, wrote:
>
> I think that we should understand what exactly does CLC do? What should it do?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20210217/28a96b33/attachment-0001.html>