Haskell-Platform Committee Action!
duncan.coutts at googlemail.com
Sat Dec 18 19:36:44 EST 2010
On 17 December 2010 08:07, Isaac Dupree <ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org> wrote:
> You're right. So, let's see if I'm clear what an HP proposal is
> specifically: To add a package, or to remove a package. But not to upgrade
> a package or change a package (except where it adds new dependencies that
> are not in the Platform). Is that right? (It's a mechanical definition
> like that?)
Right. For upgrade it is assumed that the maintainers are sensible.
We tedn to assume there will be no deletions, more likely
replacements. The release team can also drop a package for technical
>> However, I think it still needs to be clear that there's no extra
>> decision making power given to the committee members. If there is,
>> then it needs a decision on the libraries list to delegate (and we'd
>> need to worry more about how committee members are selected and cycled
> Here's what I wrote supporting that (but left out for brevity) :
> Let's try to remember to explicitly wear our Steering Committee hats when
> we're steering (say "(on behalf of the Steering Committee)" or such).
> Remember, steering has no authority, and exerts no opinions of its own
> regarding a proposal. That's its strength.
> (I wonder if we can make it easy for the libraries list to remember that
> we're being authorityless. We could have a standard signature, something
Hmm. Since people do forget, e.g. SPJ asking for the committee to take
the final decisions itself.
> like "On behalf of the powerless Steering Committee" except it should sound
> honest rather than ironic.)
More information about the Haskell-platform