| For the record, I am also not sure Proposal 3 is a good idea :) | | However, I do think we could clarify what the respective | responsibilities of the core libraries committee and Haskell Prime | committees are.
My instinct is this: Haskell Prime: language Core Libraries Committee: libraries That seems simple. If we try to move the largest and most challenging library design tasks from CLC to HP, I fear that we will overload the latter and devalue the former. | You are absolutely correct that moving the question to the Haskell Prime | committee risks pushing the issue around. The idea behind the separation | outlined above is to reduce the treadmill; the two bodies use different | processes, with different time frames, to arrive at decisions. Some | library decisions may deserve a longer deliberative process. I do agree that some library changes are far-reaching, and need a more deliberative process. I think the CLC is in the process of developing such a process. Moreover, I trust them to be able to tell the difference between low-impact and high-impact changes. That said, as HP moves towards a new language Report, it would be good if CLC similarly moved towards a new libraries Report, so that there was a single unified document, just as we have had to date. Simon _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
