Why base library changes are only discussed on GHC issue tracker and not on the libraries@ list?
hecate at glitchbra.in
Wed Jul 7 20:52:16 UTC 2021
I would like also to address the fact that the CLC's communication
efforts suffer from a lack of attention that undermines its legitimacy
when decisions like the ByteArray relocation are taken.
I understand it is the CLC's prerogative to undertake such changes, but
this is typically the kind of thing that warrants an announcement, and I
bet people on this list would have wanted to learn about it through
official channels rather than in the middle of a recriminations thread.
Being a good communicator is indeed part of the required qualities of a
core maintainer¹, it is a shame that this situation is not taken care of.
Le 07/07/2021 à 22:42, Hécate a écrit :
> It is unfortunately true that whilst many excellent point of views
> have been given on subjects discussed on this mailing-list (and I have
> been lucky to benefit from them directly), it is also a terrible
> platform for the kind of feedback that most need when interacting with
> the CLC.
> I know it's complicated for the committee members to express an
> opinion publicly without the weight of their status.
> Regarding "controversial" proposals, I fear that the definition of the
> term according to the Wiki page is a bit too broad, and I think that
> we would benefit from a clarification regarding the process so that it
> depends less on bikeshedding as the main source of feedback for Core
> Libraries changes.
> I believe we have an invaluable source of knowledge in this
> mailing-list, but that it is not suited for some discussions that are
> being held here. The format of this mailing-list proves to be
> extremely painful and demotivating for people who wish to improve the
> status quo, and it is hard to make relevant comments without direct
> access to the patch so that conversations can revolve around the code.
> Le 07/07/2021 à 20:23, Andrew Lelechenko a écrit :
>> To put it blunt, libraries mail list has a reputation of a place,
>> where things are never got done. Using it for any meaningful
>> discussion is an obsolete practice and is actually less inclusive
>> than relevant issue trackers.
>> I suggest we use libraries mail list to announce (controversial)
>> proposals, but rely on other, more suitable media to discuss them.
>> Best regards,
>>> Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 18:11:41 +0300
>>> From: Oleg Grenrus <oleg.grenrus at iki.fi>
>>> 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
>>> 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
More information about the Libraries