| > So if someone actually follows through with this as an official | > libraries submission (with a patch, deadline, etc.), the odds seem in | > favor of it. | | I'll try to see it through, although the process seems rather daunting. | It has annoyed me for too long.
I think there is general agreement that * The library submission process is too daunting, especially because you have to come up with a complete implementation of a proposal before you even know whether it's going to fly. * The process gets stuck because achieving universal consensus is too difficult * The maintainer "[email protected]" means that no individual feels responsible for making a decision on a proposal. What we need is something to put in its place. Simon and I have been cooking up a proposal. Here it is: http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Library_submissions/NewDraft It is aimed just at libraries whose maintainer is listed as [email protected]. (The thousands of other libraries with named maintainers can obviously do whatever their maintainer wants, although perhaps this new draft may be useful for them too.) It's a draft. What do you think of it? Do you think it would be better than the status quo? Can you suggest any improvements? ALSO: does anyone (or two or three people) want to volunteer to act as maintainer for any of the "Volunteer needed" packages? Johan, I was thinking you might serve for 'containers', perhaps in harness with someone else since it is such a crucial package. Simon _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
