Create 2023-02-09.md

Author: david-christiansen

meetings/2023-02-09.md

@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@
+# TWG 2023-02-09
+
+[Last meeting's notes](https://github.com/haskellfoundation/tech-proposals/blob/main/meetings/2023-01-12.md)
+
+## Present
+ * Laurent
+ * Davean
+ * David
+ * John
+ * Luke
+ * Gershom
+ * Hécate
+
+## Agenda
+
+### Project Updates
+
+#### Advisory DB
+
+#### errors.haskell.org
+
+Davean: how many visitors?
+
+David: Unknown; we're hosted on GitHub pages and don't have something like Google Analytics on the page.
+
+Gershom: What about hosting it on the haskell.org hosting? We can turn off IP addresses in logs if worried about GDPR.
+
+Hécate: What about users in Iran and Cuba?
+
+Gershom: Someone was blocking our CDN.
+
+David: No objections to moving to haskell.org hosting. It would be nice to have stats about which pages are most popular and which 404s are most popular.
+
+Davean: We can add awstats that extracts stats from a log in a cron job before the logs are deletes.
+
+David: Who does this?
+
+Davean: Send SSH key for uploader and for David to get SFTP access.
+
+Gershom: Here's the haskell.org scripts: https://github.com/haskell-infra/www.haskell.org/tree/master/.github/workflows
+
+Timeline:
+ 1. Davean does awstats, David sets up parallel uploading
+ 2. Then we debug the new host, when it works, transition DNS.
+
+
+
+#### Timing
+Can we move it 30 minutes later?
+
+Works for all present.
+
+### Open Proposals
+
+#### Standard Library Reform
+https://github.com/haskellfoundation/tech-proposals/pull/47
+
+The proposal was just updated immediately prior to the meeting. There seems to be an emerging consensus that this is a good idea.
+
+Remaining work is small details, read-through, then un-draft and submit for a vote.
+
+David asked for specific requests for help, rather than general ones. Perhaps a synchronous read-through on a call could be possible?
+
+Laurent volunteered for a synchronous read-through with John. They can also discuss Haddock.
+
+#### IDE/Test Integration
+https://github.com/haskellfoundation/tech-proposals/pull/46
+
+David was supposed to send a quick email to get a Davean/santiweight conversation going, but failed to do so. Will do.
+
+
+#### Maximally decoupling Haddock and GHC
+https://github.com/haskellfoundation/tech-proposals/pull/44
+
+We should probably close this right now, not because it's a bad idea, but because it exceeds current time resources. 
+
+David: Is it worth spending some of the foundation resources to make it happen?
+
+Gershom: could this understanding be converted to a GSoC proposal? Even if it's not done in GSoC, having it in that format is a great way to get volunteers in other contexts.
+
+Laurent: Can definitely do this. Not sure whether it's too much work. Will try to make the proposal by Feb 12th. 
+
+Gershom: Will give feedback. 
+
+#### Other Business
+
+##### `ghc-prim` cleanup
+
+Laurent: On John's proposal, Bodigrim suggested looking at people to move from `ghc-prim` to `GHC.Exts` from `base`. Can we all work together to follow reverse dependencies from `ghc-prim` to point them at `base` instead?
+
+Davean: We can't do this for everything, some programs just need `ghc-prim`. 
+
+Gershom: Using Hackage reverse dependencies?
+
+Laurent: yes! 14k packages transitively depend on `ghc-prim`.
+
+We discussed a variety of packages that use it, but where we don't think that it should. 
+
+Davean: most uses of `ghc-prim` are in fact incorrect, becuase using the unboxed type is equivalent to the boxed one, and programmers are copy-pasting.
+
+John: we need to establish clear guidance as to what the best practice is here, rather than relying on our fractured oral histories.
+
+Gershom: There's a give and take. The guidance will come from changing things and seeing what happens and can't be entirely _a priori_.
+
+Can we scale this up? Instead of Laurent doing the work directly, what about doing the work but documenting it underway and recruiting further recruits as we go? The `prim` cleanup crew proposal?
+
+Laurent: This is the idea for the proposal. Two parts:
+1. Identify low-hanging fruits (`ghc-prim`, what else?)
+2. Write the guidance
+
+##### Hackage new account approval
+Gershom: The Hackage approvals team gets burned out. Can we automate the process more? We need to avoid spam (manual measure). The current one is arduous - we need to increase the size of the team. We don't have an exact answer.
+
+David: What about an arxiv style vouching process?
+
+Gershom: Proposals welcome - can we write that up into a worked-through proposal? GSoC or otherwise?
+
+Davean: We need to keep the current one for now. What about publishing the requirements on the page instead of sending them as an email so people can do the work up-front?