Why base library changes are only discussed on GHC issue tracker and not on the libraries@ list?

[Carter Schonwald]

Agreed.  This is a problem.  I’ve tried to help make current clc folks
aware of this privately a time or two this past year :(

The only private part should be public coms on their discussion group to
record voting on stuff that isn’t unanimous. Anything beyond that fails to
align with healthy collaborative discourse norms

More concerningly, only ~2-3 members of the current clc seem to be actively
involved in public discussions on the library list or GitHub.  And a deep
misunderstanding that they need be maintainers of stuff that falls under
the umbrella of core libraries now.  Which is a fiction invented only on
the past two years.  Clc was formed to help guide decisions on base and be
a suport for core libraries authors/maintainers.  Not as an authority over
those maintainers.

There’s def problems with stuff and a lot of folks have privately expressed
a lot of frustration about this over the past 12 months.

On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 11:12 AM Oleg Grenrus <oleg.grenrus at iki.fi> wrote:

> For example
>
> - https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/20044 ByteArray migration
> from primitive to base
> - https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/20027 Changing Show String
> behavior
>
> Why they are discussed "in private", I thought libraries@ list is where
> such changes should be discussed.
>
> - Oleg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20210707/07116922/attachment.html>