On 2018-10-05 09:10 AM, Henrik Nilsson wrote:
Hi,
On 10/05/2018 01:20 PM, Mario Blažević wrote:
I hereby propose we formally disband the present Haskell 2020
committee. Our performance has been so dismal
It has.
And I should apologise in particular: I've just had far less time than
I thought over the past year for a variety of reasons.
that I feel this is the
only course of action that gives Haskell 2020 any chance of fruition. A
new committee could then be formed with some more dedicated membership.
I'm less convinced about that, though. I believe those who signed up
for H2020 actually are people who believe in the value of an updated
standard and has core expertise to make it happen.
Regarding the beliefs, if we really represent the most zealous
group of Haskell enthusiasts, I have to say the community is in deep
trouble. I have no evidence, but I can only hope you're wrong.
As for the expertise, my impression is that *everybody* who
self-nominated for the committee got accepted. My own self-nomination
e-mail [1] explicitly said that
The main reason I'm applying is because I'm afraid that the commitee
might disband like the previous one. If there are enough members
already, feel free to ignore my nomination.
Yet I'm in. This was not a high bar to clear.
I can't see how giving up and forming a new group would speed things
up or even
increase the chance of success.
I was kinda hoping for a Simon ex machina, where a few
universally-accepted members of the community hand-pick a new committee.
Alternatively, we could come up with some stricter criteria for the next
committee before we disband but that assumes we can even get a quorum.
Lest I'm suspected of some Machiavellian plot, let me be clear that
I refuse to be a part of the next committee, if my proposal should be
accepted. Honestly I feel that all members of the present committee with
any sense of shame should recuse themselves as well, but that's not up
to me.
Instead, what about focusing on identifying a couple of things that
absolutely would have to be in H2020 to make a new standard
worthwhile, like multi-parameter type classes, possibly GADTs,
then figure out what else is needed to support that (like what
Anthony Clayden sketched), and with that as a basis, find out
exactly what technical problems, if any, are hindering progress?
If this could be neatly summarized, then we'd actually be in a position
to make some progress.
That is much the plan we agreed on over a year ago during ICFP
2018. The activity since then is plain to see.
[1]
http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-prime/2015-September/003939.html
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
