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.

[Francesco Ariis]

Post by Daniel Cartwright
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!

[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.

Post by Francesco Ariis

Post by Daniel Cartwright
Phase 3. Proposal is approved by the LML - members of LML, for a period

of

Post by Daniel Cartwright
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
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[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.

Post by 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.

Post by Francesco Ariis

Post by Daniel Cartwright
Phase 3. Proposal is approved by the LML - members of LML, for a period

of

Post by Daniel Cartwright
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
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

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

[Daniel Cartwright]

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.

Post by 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.

Post by 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.

Post by Daniel Cartwright

Post by Daniel Cartwright
Phase 3. Proposal is approved by the LML - members of LML, for a

period of

Post by Daniel Cartwright
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
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

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

[Francesco Ariis]

Post by 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.

I will second what David Feuer said: consensus among ML participants,
if that fails the CLC can intervene.