Re: [Haskell-community] Haskell.org committee proposals & GRC
Hi Michael, Thanks for the feedback. You're completely right: that sort of documentation is sorely lacking. I'll update the proposal and/or repository to more explicit about this. Warm regards Jasper On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:40:19PM +0200, Michael Snoyman wrote: > Maybe this is just me, but I think it would be useful to have documented in > that repository as well what items fall under the purview of the haskell.org > committee, and therefore what kinds of proposals would be appropriate. > Maybe this is just me, but I'm not certain where the line would be drawn > between different groups and committees within the wider Haskell ecosystem. > If this is already documented somewhere, a link from the README.md would > IMO be very helpful. > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 5:23 PM Jasper Van der Jeugt > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > The Haskell.org committee would like to adopt a new proposal format, > > inspired by the GHC Steering Committee. We have created a repository > > with proposals here: > > > >https://github.com/haskell-org/committee > > > > I would like to call the members of the committee to vote on these > > proposals, but we also value community feedback. The two proposals > > are: > > > > - 0001: Establish the proposal process > > https://github.com/haskell-org/committee/pull/1 > > - 0002: Adopt the GRC code of conduct > > https://github.com/haskell-org/committee/pull/2 > > > > For posterity and archival, I am including the full text of the > > proposals here. For the record, I am in favor of accepting both > > proposals. > > > > # Proposal 0001: Haskell.org proposals > > > > In an effort to make the work of Haskell.org committee more > > transparent, we would like to adopt a proposal process similar to the > > [GHC Steering Committee]. > > > > The proposed process is fairly light: > > > > 1. New proposals are created as pull requests with a single file, > > following a `proposals/XYZW-some-title.extention` naming scheme. > > A template is available in `proposals/-template.md`. > > > > 2. Proposals must have an author set who is responsible for driving > > the discussion. If the author is not a member of the Haskell.org > > committee, we may additionally appoint a shepherd from the > > committee to help with this. It is the responsibility of the > > author and the shepherd to notify any communities that may be > > interested in the proposal, so we can gather community feedback. > > > > 3. The proposal must have a link to the PR discussion, so readers can > > easily find the full discussion once the PR is merged. > > > > 4. We strive to make unanimous decisions, but we can use a majority > > vote (the committee has an odd number of members) to move forward. > > > > 5. What happens next depends on whether or not the proposal is > > accepted: > > > > - If the proposal is accepted, `date-accepted` is set and the > > proposal is merged into the repository. A summary with a link > > to the full PR discussion is sent out to > > `commun...@haskell.org`. > > > > - If the proposal is not accepted, the proposal is also merged > > for posterity, but a section is ammended to explain why it was > > rejected. > > > > # Proposal 0002: Guidelines for Respectful Communication > > > > The Haskell.org committee adopts the [Guidelines for Respectful > > Communication][grc]. > > > > This applies only to members of the board, in in all our public > > interactions in the Haskell sphere, including email, social media, > > discussion forums, and so on. > > > > We may later adopt a stricter Code of Conduct, or set a Code of > > Conduct for platforms we manage (e.g. Discourse, mailing lists), but > > that is out of scope for this proposal. > > > > [grc]: https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/blob/master/GRC.rst > > [GHC Steering Committee]: https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals > > > > Warm regards > > Jasper > > ___ > > Haskell-community mailing list > > Haskell-community@haskell.org > > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community > > ___ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
[Haskell-community] Haskell.org committee proposals & GRC
Hi all, The Haskell.org committee would like to adopt a new proposal format, inspired by the GHC Steering Committee. We have created a repository with proposals here: https://github.com/haskell-org/committee I would like to call the members of the committee to vote on these proposals, but we also value community feedback. The two proposals are: - 0001: Establish the proposal process https://github.com/haskell-org/committee/pull/1 - 0002: Adopt the GRC code of conduct https://github.com/haskell-org/committee/pull/2 For posterity and archival, I am including the full text of the proposals here. For the record, I am in favor of accepting both proposals. # Proposal 0001: Haskell.org proposals In an effort to make the work of Haskell.org committee more transparent, we would like to adopt a proposal process similar to the [GHC Steering Committee]. The proposed process is fairly light: 1. New proposals are created as pull requests with a single file, following a `proposals/XYZW-some-title.extention` naming scheme. A template is available in `proposals/-template.md`. 2. Proposals must have an author set who is responsible for driving the discussion. If the author is not a member of the Haskell.org committee, we may additionally appoint a shepherd from the committee to help with this. It is the responsibility of the author and the shepherd to notify any communities that may be interested in the proposal, so we can gather community feedback. 3. The proposal must have a link to the PR discussion, so readers can easily find the full discussion once the PR is merged. 4. We strive to make unanimous decisions, but we can use a majority vote (the committee has an odd number of members) to move forward. 5. What happens next depends on whether or not the proposal is accepted: - If the proposal is accepted, `date-accepted` is set and the proposal is merged into the repository. A summary with a link to the full PR discussion is sent out to `commun...@haskell.org`. - If the proposal is not accepted, the proposal is also merged for posterity, but a section is ammended to explain why it was rejected. # Proposal 0002: Guidelines for Respectful Communication The Haskell.org committee adopts the [Guidelines for Respectful Communication][grc]. This applies only to members of the board, in in all our public interactions in the Haskell sphere, including email, social media, discussion forums, and so on. We may later adopt a stricter Code of Conduct, or set a Code of Conduct for platforms we manage (e.g. Discourse, mailing lists), but that is out of scope for this proposal. [grc]: https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/blob/master/GRC.rst [GHC Steering Committee]: https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals Warm regards Jasper ___ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
Re: [Haskell-community] 2018 state of Haskell survey
Hi Taylor, Yes, we're happy to support it from Haskell.org. One additional ask from our side would be that the raw results are published as well, but I saw in the issue you're already planning on doing that. Cheers Jasper On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 11:18:30AM -0400, Taylor Fausak wrote: > We’re one week out from the release of the survey. I plan on spending this > weekend putting the finishing touches on it. Can I plan on announcing it as > the official state of Haskell 2018 survey, supported by both Haskell Weekly > and Haskell.org <http://haskell.org/>? > > > On Oct 17, 2018, at 7:00 PM, Jasper Van der Jeugt wrote: > > > > Hi Taylor, > > > > Just a small comment: I would like to keep the survey open a bit longer -- > > I would suggest two weeks. This gives us a bit more time to push it out > > twice to as many channels as possible (once at the start and a reminder > > after a week or so). My intuition is that we'll be able to gather > > significantly more responses that way. > > > > Thanks again for organizing this! > > > > Cheers > > Jasper > > > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 at 00:55, Taylor Fausak > <mailto:tay...@fausak.me>> wrote: > > Thank you all for the wonderful feedback so far! I greatly appreciate all > > of it. > > > > I didn’t mean to be exclusionary with my language before, and I thank y’all > > for correcting me there. “We’re doing this together for the benefit of all” > > is an excellent way to say what I’m shooting for here. > > > > My goal for the survey is to be useful to many different groups of people: > > the GHC team, library authors, application developers, repository > > maintainers, prospective employees, hiring managers, community organizers, > > and no doubt many more groups that I’m not thinking of right now. I want to > > avoid results that are neat but not useful. I also want to avoid results > > that simply throw fuel onto common flame wars. > > > > Last year I announced the survey results and provided some commentary. I > > suspect I’ll do something similar this year, although reading your comments > > here makes me want to do less analyzing in favor of simply publishing. I am > > not particularly adept at analyzing survey results and am bound to make > > some rookie mistakes. In fact, one of the reasons that I published the > > results last year was so that someone who actually knew what they were > > doing could slice and dice the data. > > > > As far as scheduling is concerned, I plan to keep the survey open for a > > week, from November 1st to 7th. Publishing the results should happen > > relatively quickly after that. I slowed myself down last year by rendering > > a bunch of graphs, and even so I published on November 15th. > > > > It sounds like the Haskell.org committee is broadly in favor of backing the > > upcoming Haskell Weekly survey. Is that correct? In either case, what are > > the next steps? > > > > > On Oct 16, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Boespflug, Mathieu > > <mailto:m...@tweag.io>> wrote: > > > > > > Since I was pinged up-thread, might as well chime in. If only to say > > > "I agree": selection bias is what it is. Taylor's efforts to come to > > > this committee are laudable. And really could help mitigate some > > > issues we've seen with other surveys. Selection bias isn't something > > > worth agonizing over, provided we're careful to say in the analysis of > > > the results: "We found that X% of the respondents of this survey use > > > Y", not "X% of Haskell devs use Y". > > > > > > On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 21:02, Simon Peyton Jones via Haskell-community > > > mailto:haskell-community@haskell.org>> > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> | Hi Taylor. I like the way you pose things here: "I don't expect that > > >> | to remove selection bias, but it will let me (us, really) say: We're > > >> | doing this together for the benefit of all sides". I think that's a > > >> | better place to start from. > > >> > > >> I like this too -- and like Gershom, I'd delete "sides". We aspire > > >> to work together, not on different sides. > > >> > > >> | earlier I've been thinking about a bit, where you wrote: "My goal is > > >> | for this survey to be *the* authoritative Haskell survey and for the > > >> | community to broadly accept
Re: [Haskell-community] 2018 state of Haskell survey
Hi Taylor, Just a small comment: I would like to keep the survey open a bit longer -- I would suggest two weeks. This gives us a bit more time to push it out twice to as many channels as possible (once at the start and a reminder after a week or so). My intuition is that we'll be able to gather significantly more responses that way. Thanks again for organizing this! Cheers Jasper On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 at 00:55, Taylor Fausak wrote: > Thank you all for the wonderful feedback so far! I greatly appreciate all > of it. > > I didn’t mean to be exclusionary with my language before, and I thank > y’all for correcting me there. “We’re doing this together for the benefit > of all” is an excellent way to say what I’m shooting for here. > > My goal for the survey is to be useful to many different groups of people: > the GHC team, library authors, application developers, repository > maintainers, prospective employees, hiring managers, community organizers, > and no doubt many more groups that I’m not thinking of right now. I want to > avoid results that are neat but not useful. I also want to avoid results > that simply throw fuel onto common flame wars. > > Last year I announced the survey results and provided some commentary. I > suspect I’ll do something similar this year, although reading your comments > here makes me want to do less analyzing in favor of simply publishing. I am > not particularly adept at analyzing survey results and am bound to make > some rookie mistakes. In fact, one of the reasons that I published the > results last year was so that someone who actually knew what they were > doing could slice and dice the data. > > As far as scheduling is concerned, I plan to keep the survey open for a > week, from November 1st to 7th. Publishing the results should happen > relatively quickly after that. I slowed myself down last year by rendering > a bunch of graphs, and even so I published on November 15th. > > It sounds like the Haskell.org committee is broadly in favor of backing > the upcoming Haskell Weekly survey. Is that correct? In either case, what > are the next steps? > > > On Oct 16, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Boespflug, Mathieu wrote: > > > > Since I was pinged up-thread, might as well chime in. If only to say > > "I agree": selection bias is what it is. Taylor's efforts to come to > > this committee are laudable. And really could help mitigate some > > issues we've seen with other surveys. Selection bias isn't something > > worth agonizing over, provided we're careful to say in the analysis of > > the results: "We found that X% of the respondents of this survey use > > Y", not "X% of Haskell devs use Y". > > > > On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 21:02, Simon Peyton Jones via Haskell-community > > wrote: > >> > >> | Hi Taylor. I like the way you pose things here: "I don't expect that > >> | to remove selection bias, but it will let me (us, really) say: We're > >> | doing this together for the benefit of all sides". I think that's a > >> | better place to start from. > >> > >> I like this too -- and like Gershom, I'd delete "sides". We aspire > >> to work together, not on different sides. > >> > >> | earlier I've been thinking about a bit, where you wrote: "My goal is > >> | for this survey to be *the* authoritative Haskell survey and for the > >> | community to broadly accept it's results." > >> > >> This sounds a bit too exclusive to me, and implicitly critical of other > >> work. Better to stick to the positives: you simply want the > >> opinions of a broad constituency on a broad range of questions. > >> > >> | Anyway, this is all a long-winded way of suggesting that it might be > >> | good if the purpose of the survey was explicitly set out as trying to > >> | inform developers of haskell libraries and tools (and educational > >> | materials) regarding the systems their potential users work on and > >> | develop, and their habits and practices in doing so, and where they > >> | encounter difficulty. That is explicitly as a way of learning rather > >> | than as any sort of horse-race or popularity contest. > >> > >> That sounds good to me -- but again in drafting the goals I'd stick > >> to the positives, and not speak about horse-races. > >> > >> Simon > >> ___ > >> Haskell-community mailing list > >> Haskell-community@haskell.org > >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community > > ___ > Haskell-community mailing list > Haskell-community@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community > -- Jasper ___ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
Re: [Haskell-community] (no subject)
Hello Prajawal, Let me know which project(s) you are interested in and I can provide you with the contact information. Cheers Jasper On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 02:19:28PM +0530, prajawal sinha wrote: > Hey!!! where could I get haskell gsco mentors contact from? > ___ > Haskell-community mailing list > Haskell-community@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community ___ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
