realmgsloan

Yup. Stack was born out of our internal build tool "fpbuild". We found that having a good build tool was crucial to our productivity. Stack was created to better satisfy our own needs, and we shared it with the community so that they can also benefit from it and help make it better.

When someone's consistently had good contributions and discussion, we've granted them maintainer level privileges. Certainly quite a lot of stack's development and maintenance is done by FP Complete folks. However, our intention is to make the project as open to contribution and feedback as possible.

No, it isn't. I don't use HN much, just taking a look at this conversation. I shouldn't even respond to this comment considering its tone. You should keep in mind that this was in discussion of a new serialization library, not the PVP.

I actually had to create this new account because I forgot my password and my old account (probably mgsloan) doesn't have an email address associated.

> All I said was that FP complete is setting a bad example by actively refusing to follow established community guidelines (PvP).

We do follow the important parts of the PvP. Personally, I consider the 3rd section of the PvP a failed experiment. It just doesn't work well, and the maintainer / hackage trustee overhead is too damn high. My theory is that the folks who are adamant about the PvP are either damn tenacious and dedicated (hvr, dcoutts, etc), or people who don't deal with projects with many dependencies and custom packages.

So, yes, we are willing to dump tradition when the tradition is nonsense. I think that Haskellers ought to understand this very well - tradition should be questioned - particularly when it is a major pain point.

When there is great value in doing so, we are questioning some traditions and doing our own thing. This attitude appears to be ruffling the feathers of the vocal minority.