= The Package Addition Process: a review =

This page describes our experience trying to get packages adopted via [http://trac.haskell.org.nyud.net/haskell-platform/wiki/AddingPackages the Haskell Platform addition process]. Particularly, the experience around [http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.haskell.libraries/13613 the 'text' package discussion].

== Feedback ==

Feedback from that effort is gathered below:

  * So far, very few proposals have been made, so the goals to grow haven't been achieved.

  * Lots of review did take place, from many participants. 107 emails were produced in two months, [http://hpaste.org/41240/reviews_of_the_text_package by 29 reviewers]. Several detailed reviews took place.

Other comments:

  * I think that the "please speak up only if you dissent" model is quite counterproductive. It gives the strong (but, I hope, incorrect) impression that those who care are all dissenters. 

 * Too much bikeshedding took place, relative to the overall goals of the Haskell Platform (to be comprehensive, to grow, and to be high quality).

 * The existing libraries are often in a poorer state than the new libraries, yet the new libraries are possibly subject to blocking objections, despite those flaws existing in the current libraries.

 * It is unclear on what issues people should raise blocking objections, and when conditional acceptance is suitable.

 * The steering committee didn't play an active role in herding discussion, or communicating expectations.

== Possible actions ==

 * Push on, as we get as a community review more things, the cultural norms will become clearer, and the mechanism more efficient.
 * Limit the scope and time for reviewers (e.g. an opt-in list like Haskell Prime)
 * Explicitly state new norms for when something may be significant enough to be a valid reason to block.