On April 16, 2015 at 8:39:40 AM, Mathieu Boespflug ([email protected]) wrote:

> It ultimately hurts the community when people repeatedly say things to
> the effect of, "yep, I hear you, interesting topic, I have a really
> cool solution to all of what you're saying - will be done Real Soon
> Now(tm)", or are happy to share details but only within a limited
> circle of cognoscenti. Because the net result is that other interested
> parties either unknowingly duplicate effort, or stall thinking that
> others are tackling the issue, sometimes for years.

I think this is a valid concern. Let me make a suggestion as to why this does 
not happen as much as we might like as well (other than not-enough-time which 
is always a common reason). Knowing a little about different people’s style of 
working on open source projects, I have observed that some people are keen to 
throw out lots of ideas and blog while their projects are in the very early 
stages of formation. Sometimes this leads to useful discussions, sometimes it 
leads to lots of premature bikeshedding. But, often, other people don’t feel 
comfortable throwing out what they know are rough and unfinished thoughts to 
the world. They would rather either polish the proposal more fully, or would 
like to have a sufficient proof-of-concept that they feel confident the idea is 
actually tractable. I do not mean to suggest one or the other style is “better” 
— just that these are different ways that people are comfortable working, and 
they are hardwired rather deeply into their habits.

In a single commercial development environment, these things are relatively 
more straightforward to mediate, because project plans are often set top down, 
and there are in fact people whose job it is to amalgamate information between 
different developers and teams. In an open source community things are 
necessarily looser. There are going to be a range of such styles and 
approaches, and while it is sort of a pain to negotiate between all of them, I 
don’t really see an alternative.

So let me pose the opposite thing too: if there is a set of concerns/ideas 
involving core infrastructure and possible future plans, it would be good to 
reach out to the people most involved with that work and check if they have any 
projects underway but perhaps not widely announced that you might want to be 
aware of. I know that it feels it would be better to have more frequent updates 
on what projects are kicking around and what timetables. But contrariwise, it 
also feels it would be better to have more people investigate more as they 
start to pursue such projects.

Also, it is good to have different proposals on the table, so that we can 
compare them and stack up what they do and don’t solve more clearly. So, to an 
extent, I welcome duplication of proposals as long as the discussion doesn’t 
fragment too far. And it is also good to have a few proofs-of-concept floating 
about to help pin down the issues better. All this is also very much in the 
open source spirit.

One idea I have been thinking about, is a Birds of a Feather meeting at the 
upcoming ICFP in Vancouver focused just on Haskell Open-Source Infrastructure. 
That way a variety of people with a range of different ideas/projects/etc. 
could all get together in one room and share what they’re worried about and 
what they’re working on and what they’re maybe vaguely contemplating on working 
on. It’s great to see so much interest from so many quarters in various systems 
and improvements. Now to try and facilitate a bit more (loose) coordination 
between these endeavors!

Cheers,
Gershom

P.S. as a general point to bystanders in this conversation — it seems to me one 
of the best ways to help the pace of “big ticket” cabal/hackage-server work 
would be to take a look at their outstanding lists of tracker issues and see if 
you feel comfortable jumping in on the smaller stuff. The more we can keep the 
little stuff under control, the better for the developers as a whole to start 
to implement more sweeping changes.


_______________________________________________
haskell-infrastructure mailing list
[email protected]
http://community.galois.com/mailman/listinfo/haskell-infrastructure

Reply via email to