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

[Sandy Maguire]

At risk of being the messenger who gets shot....

As an outsider, it seems very reasonable to me to file a bug against the
issue tracker for a project whose code I think should be changed. For
better or worse, this is the way that 99% of software projects work.
Expecting everyone in the community to know that they _shouldn't_ be filing
bugs against the issue tracker is a losing battle. I'm more hooked in than
most, and even I didn't know this.

I can empathize with things not being done the way you'd like to be, but
the claim that things happening on the GHC tracker are done "in private" is
silly. The gitlab tracker is 10x more accessible, and the lack of community
engagement on the mailing lists speaks volumes.

And besides, nobody wants to be on a mailing list anyway. It's a terrible
experience with weird branching and no persistence, and while there are
archives, it's an extremely unpleasant thing to try to spelunk through.

Best,
Sandy

On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 8:52 AM Henning Thielemann <
lemming at henning-thielemann.de> wrote:

>
> On Wed, 7 Jul 2021, Oleg Grenrus 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.
>
> I think so, too, and I missed them as well.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210707/66117002/attachment.html>