Proposal: Formalise rules for how names are chosen for approved proposals

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Proposal: Formalise rules for how names are chosen for approved proposals

Daniel Cartwright
I have noticed, and I say this with all due respect, that the members of this Library Mailing List (LML) have on multiple occasions derailed otherwise useful conversations over the choice of a name, which is a wasteful use of our time and effort. Below is a rough sketch of how I believe this issue could be addressed.

Phase 1: LML member proposes change to widely used library, such as base
Phase 2. Proposal is declined by the LML as being sufficiently useful - do nothing
Phase 3. Proposal is approved by the LML - members of LML, for a period of 3 weeks, each get up to 3 picks for a name. At the end of the 3 week period, the occurrence of each name is tallied. The name with the most tallies, becomes the name.

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal: Formalise rules for how names are chosen for approved proposals

Francesco Ariis
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:21:35AM -0400, Daniel Cartwright wrote:
> Phase 3. Proposal is approved by the LML - members of LML, for a period of
> 3 weeks, each get up to 3 picks for a name. At the end of the 3 week
> period, the occurrence of each name is tallied. The name with the most
> tallies, becomes the name.

I would rather have Core Libraries Committee to decide. They are
experienced, trusted and embodies the community as a whole!
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal: Formalise rules for how names are chosen for approved proposals

Daniel Cartwright
Currently the decision of a name has been left to LML, but I can see leaving it to the Core Libraries Committee (CLC) as being a potentially good idea. One problem with that is fewer people = fewer chance for a good name. I know many programmers have trouble naming things all the time. Good names are hard to come by, and by leaving it to the LML we can hope that statistically that one of the best names will win.

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:00 PM, Francesco Ariis <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:21:35AM -0400, Daniel Cartwright wrote:
> Phase 3. Proposal is approved by the LML - members of LML, for a period of
> 3 weeks, each get up to 3 picks for a name. At the end of the 3 week
> period, the occurrence of each name is tallied. The name with the most
> tallies, becomes the name.

I would rather have Core Libraries Committee to decide. They are
experienced, trusted and embodies the community as a whole!
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries


_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal: Formalise rules for how names are chosen for approved proposals

David Feuer
Sometimes the choice of name is fairly uncontroversial and no further bureaucracy is required. Sometimes a good name bubbles up clearly out of the discussion. The rest of the time we may need something more formal.

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 12:13 PM Daniel Cartwright <[hidden email]> wrote:
Currently the decision of a name has been left to LML, but I can see leaving it to the Core Libraries Committee (CLC) as being a potentially good idea. One problem with that is fewer people = fewer chance for a good name. I know many programmers have trouble naming things all the time. Good names are hard to come by, and by leaving it to the LML we can hope that statistically that one of the best names will win.

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:00 PM, Francesco Ariis <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:21:35AM -0400, Daniel Cartwright wrote:
> Phase 3. Proposal is approved by the LML - members of LML, for a period of
> 3 weeks, each get up to 3 picks for a name. At the end of the 3 week
> period, the occurrence of each name is tallied. The name with the most
> tallies, becomes the name.

I would rather have Core Libraries Committee to decide. They are
experienced, trusted and embodies the community as a whole!
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal: Formalise rules for how names are chosen for approved proposals

Francesco Ariis
In reply to this post by Daniel Cartwright
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:12:07PM -0400, Daniel Cartwright wrote:
> Currently the decision of a name has been left to LML, but I can see
> leaving it to the Core Libraries Committee (CLC) as being a potentially
> good idea. One problem with that is fewer people = fewer chance for a good
> name. I know many programmers have trouble naming things all the time. Good
> names are hard to come by, and by leaving it to the LML we can hope that
> statistically that one of the best names will win.

I will second what David Feuer said: consensus among ML participants,
if that fails the CLC can intervene.
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposal: Formalise rules for how names are chosen for approved proposals

Daniel Cartwright
In reply to this post by David Feuer
I agree, but I believe that their should be a clear cutoff for when it becomes silly to continue debating a name (only after consensus of approval). Perhaps 3 weeks is too short, but I am strongly in favour of a cutoff for a discussion period of the name, maybe on a per-proposal basis.

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:26 PM, David Feuer <[hidden email]> wrote:
Sometimes the choice of name is fairly uncontroversial and no further bureaucracy is required. Sometimes a good name bubbles up clearly out of the discussion. The rest of the time we may need something more formal.

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 12:13 PM Daniel Cartwright <[hidden email]> wrote:
Currently the decision of a name has been left to LML, but I can see leaving it to the Core Libraries Committee (CLC) as being a potentially good idea. One problem with that is fewer people = fewer chance for a good name. I know many programmers have trouble naming things all the time. Good names are hard to come by, and by leaving it to the LML we can hope that statistically that one of the best names will win.

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:00 PM, Francesco Ariis <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:21:35AM -0400, Daniel Cartwright wrote:
> Phase 3. Proposal is approved by the LML - members of LML, for a period of
> 3 weeks, each get up to 3 picks for a name. At the end of the 3 week
> period, the occurrence of each name is tallied. The name with the most
> tallies, becomes the name.

I would rather have Core Libraries Committee to decide. They are
experienced, trusted and embodies the community as a whole!
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries


_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries