I thought Alain already replied? He and Pali are running some ghc-builder boxes, and i'm helping with code review for patches into ghc-builder
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 3:10 AM, Simon Peyton Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > | This response has gotten pretty long! Apologies if I missed something, > | or otherwise misunderstood. Anyway, if there's a path here that seems > | sensible, I'll have a go at it. > > William, I am not qualified to comment on the details, but thank you for > offering to help. I do urge you to pick some initial tasks that *don't* > involve solving the full cross-compilation problem, desirable as it is. I > fear that it is a swamp from which you will not emerge soon, and it'd be > better to have some successes to encourage you, and some experience to > build on, before diving into it. > > Everyone: no responses yet to my email below. Suppose Austin plays > secretary: would people like to volunteer to be part of the GHC > Nightly-Build/Continuous-Integration Task Force? > > Simon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Simon Peyton Jones > Sent: 18 June 2014 23:48 > To: Simon Peyton Jones; Páli Gábor János; Alain O'Dea > Cc: [email protected]; William Knop; Karel Gardas > Subject: RE: Offering GHC builder build slaves > > Back in April I said: > > | Seriously, I advertised a couple of weeks ago for help with our > | nightly- build infrastructure. Quite a few people responded -- thank > | you very much. > | > | So we have willing horsepower. But the moment we lack leadership. > | Alain rightly says "I don't know what the process is" because we don't > | *have* a process. We need a mechanism for creating a process, taking > | decisions, etc. > | > | I think what is needed is: > | > | * A group of people willing to act as a kind of committee. That > | could be everyone who replied. You could create a mailing list, > | or (initially better) just chat on ghc-devs. But it would be > | useful to have a list of who is involved. > | > | * Someone (or a couple of people) to play the role of chair. > | That doesn't mean an autocrat... it means someone who gently pushes > | discussions to a conclusion, and says "I propose that we do X". > | > | * Then the group can formulate a plan and proceed with it. > | For example, should Pali's efforts be "blessed"? I don't > | know enough to know, but you guys do. > | > | In my experience, people are often unwilling to put themselves forward > | as chair, not because they are unwilling, but because they feel it'd > | be "pushy". So I suggest this: if you think (based on the traffic > | you've > | seen) that X would be a chair you'd trust, suggest them. > | > | In short: power to the people! GHC is your compiler. > > Since then various people have done various things, but so far as I know > we don't have any of the three "*" items above. The people who seem in > principle willing to help include Joachim Breitner < > [email protected]> Herbert Valerio Riedel <[email protected]> > Páli Gábor János <[email protected]> Karel Gardas < > [email protected]> Alain O'Dea <[email protected]> William > Knop <[email protected]> Austin Seipp <[email protected]> > > There may well be others! I sense that the problem is not willingness but > simply that no one feels accredited to take the lead. Please, I would love > someone to do so! > > I was reminded of this by William Knop's recent message below, in which he > implicitly offers to help (thanks William). But his offer will fall on > deaf ears unless that little group exists to welcome him in. > > In hope, and with thanks, > > Simon > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
