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

[Hécate]

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.

Best regards,
Hécate

¹ https://wiki.haskell.org/Core_Libraries_Committee#Maintainer_qualities

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,
>> Andrew
>>
>>> 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 
>>> 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
>
-- 
Hécate ✨
🐦: @TechnoEmpress
IRC: Hecate
WWW: https://glitchbra.in
RUN: BSD