On 29 August 2016 at 17:21, Gershom B <gersh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On August 29, 2016 at 11:15:19 AM, Paolo Giarrusso > (paolo.giarru...@uni-tuebingen.de) wrote: > >> If the poll was announced there, there would still be extra friction. >> But IIUC only the mailing list was announced there. > > There is no poll. There is a modest discussion kicked off by Jason > Dagit (who used to serve on the committee, but has not been on it for > some time now) about a modest change (at this point swapping the > bitrotted minimal installers for the HP minimal installers which are > current).
One might initially think that "what's the best entry point into using Haskell" is a simple question. However, even without taking a side, we all know the topic is in fact highly contentious and it has been in the past. And since you're a community leader and I'm just a modest Haskeller, I'm sure you realize the discussion topic is not perceived as modest. At best one could argue the discussion *should* be modest, but there's technical content to it. It's also known that the committee's decision have been questioned for allegedly not listening to the community on this topic. I dislike the allegations (and find the tone unproductive), yet I think community input would be important and it's in the committee's best interest to both listen and be perceived as listening. > The committee does not operate by poll, it operates on the > basis of broad discussion (with this list being the preferred venue) > and then making choices amongst committee members as informed by that > discussion. This is laid out at > https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell.org_committee Are these procedures the best to achieve the Committee's stated goals? >> I might understand the concern about archiving, but haskell-cafe >> solves that. And "the committee can't be expected to follow >> discussions" and "is empowered to act" does sound like "the committee >> can't be expected to listen to the community”. > > It means that committee members should be expected to chase all over > social media and sort through lots of poor signal/noise ratio to find > potentially relevant discussions at all times. Rather, it is better to > centralize these things to the extent possible.That’s all. I think that's a strawman. I didn't propose to spend the day on Twitter, but to solicit input on questions of general relevance in venues where the community is. To send a post to haskell-cafe and follow the discussion—that doesn't imply following the rest of the ML (at least with the Google Groups interface, I'm sure there are many other solutions). I realize that might require time, but I frankly don't expect that "seeking to service the open source Haskell community" is easy. Cheers, -- Paolo G. Giarrusso - Ph.D. Student, Tübingen University http://ps.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/team/giarrusso/ _______________________________________________ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
