Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Proposal: Form a haskell.org committee

2010-09-06 Thread Vo Minh Thu
2010/9/6 Manuel M T Chakravarty c...@cse.unsw.edu.au:
 Ian Lynagh:
 To fix this problem, we propose that we create a haskell.org
 committee, which is responsible for answering these sorts of questions,
 although for some questions they may choose to poll the community at
 large if they think appropriate.
 [..]
 Unfortunately, this gives us a bootstrapping problem, so we suggest that
 the initial committee be chosen from open nominations by some of the
 people who currently de-facto end up making the decisions currently:
 Duncan Coutts, Isaac Jones, Ian Lynagh, Don Stewart and Malcolm Wallace.
 These 5 would still be elligible to nominate themselves. Two of the
 initial members will stand down after one year, and two after two years,
 in order to bootstrap rolling membership turnover.

 Good plan!

 Manuel

Seems very good,

Thu
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


[Haskell-cafe] RE: [Haskell] Proposal: Form a haskell.org committee

2010-09-06 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
Ian et al

| To fix this problem, we propose that we create a haskell.org
| committee, which is responsible for answering these sorts of questions,
| although for some questions they may choose to poll the community at
| large if they think appropriate.

I think that's an excellent idea.  I think there should be a web page 
describing what the committee does, who is in it, how to contact it, etc.  I'm 
sure you intended that.  An annual statement of what money came in and went out 
would be good practice.

Well the committee also be responsible for the haskell.org web site? 

| We suggest that the committee be composed of 5 representatives from the
| community, with committee members standing down after at most 3 years.
| Each year the committee will appoint one of their members to be the chair.

It's usually helpful to establish a rotation so that everyone knows who is 
going to stand down when, and to arrange that there isn't a sudden glut one 
year.  Document the stand-down dates on the committee web page.  In my 
experience, everyone forgets!

Five might be a little small.

It might be good to allow for a person to be re-elected for a second term if 
they are willing.  It's a good principle to have rotation, but a pity to lose 
willing and experienced talent.  But six years is enough.

| As membership of the Haskell community is not well-defined, and voting
| would potentially be open to abuse if anyone were able to vote, we
| propose that the committee should choose their replacements from open
| nominations.

I agree with the problem, and I think your proposed solution may do for now, 
but it's obviously not a robust solution.  I trust you five, but in three years 
time you may all have stood down!

A possible solution would be to have an electoral college of people entitled 
to vote. It should be easy to become a member of the college: any track record 
of contributions to the Haskell community, including constructive contributions 
to Haskell Cafe, would be enough.  Then the college can elect the committee.

It's debatable whether this is worth the bother at this point.  Maybe it would 
be enough to document on the committee page that we don't regard the nomination 
process as robust, and if any concern arises we will consider something more 
substantial.

Simon

___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] RE: [Haskell] Proposal: Form a haskell.org committee

2010-09-06 Thread Graham Klyne

Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:

| As membership of the Haskell community is not well-defined, and voting
| would potentially be open to abuse if anyone were able to vote, we
| propose that the committee should choose their replacements from open
| nominations.

I agree with the problem, and I think your proposed solution may do for now, 
but it's obviously not a robust solution.  I trust you five, but in three years 
time you may all have stood down!

A possible solution would be to have an electoral college of people entitled 
to vote. It should be easy to become a member of the college: any track record of 
contributions to the Haskell community, including constructive contributions to Haskell 
Cafe, would be enough.  Then the college can elect the committee.

It's debatable whether this is worth the bother at this point.  Maybe it would 
be enough to document on the committee page that we don't regard the nomination 
process as robust, and if any concern arises we will consider something more 
substantial.


FWIW, the IETF faces the same situation, and addresses it through a Nominating
Committee (NomCom) mechanism, which for the most part has worked well for many
years (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3777).

#g




___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


[Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Proposal: Form a haskell.org committee

2010-09-05 Thread Manuel M T Chakravarty
Ian Lynagh:
 To fix this problem, we propose that we create a haskell.org
 committee, which is responsible for answering these sorts of questions,
 although for some questions they may choose to poll the community at
 large if they think appropriate.
[..]
 Unfortunately, this gives us a bootstrapping problem, so we suggest that
 the initial committee be chosen from open nominations by some of the
 people who currently de-facto end up making the decisions currently:
 Duncan Coutts, Isaac Jones, Ian Lynagh, Don Stewart and Malcolm Wallace.
 These 5 would still be elligible to nominate themselves. Two of the
 initial members will stand down after one year, and two after two years,
 in order to bootstrap rolling membership turnover.

Good plan!

Manuel

___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe