I’m not enthusiastic about this project because the author has not specified anything about how that work will be done, nor even concretely what will be delivered. Remember: any call to action for open source work means that one must inevitably accept volunteers to work on the project. This raises many questions. For example:
- How will these volunteers be protected so that they don’t burn out?
- How will these volunteers be compensated (if at all?)
- Who is guiding the project direction?
- Who owns what and what’s the licensing schema if they do volunteer?
- What are the concrete deliverables?
- What kind of volunteer is desired? Who will be considered as SME’s as projects are built?
Surely the author doesn’t believe that people will join on hopes and dreams, and to succeed one needs to attract people who can move the needle in a meaningful sense in the direction of this manifesto. As someone who has maintained libraries ranging from 5k stars on github down to small projects like clearing the way for Andrew to do the
text-2.0 work, every one of those projects involved a discussion of contributor standards and most importantly an execution of those standards according to the ethos of the project. This is why I have a
CONTRIBUTING.md in every one of my projects in which I accept volunteers and a code of conduct in all fora and repositories that are going to have more diverse stake in contributing shoulder-to-shoulder without my direct involvement.
If this work has not been done, and the author has not thought about how their community will be structured, it represents an abuse of the idealism and positivity inherent in the manifesto: it exposes everyone working on the project to unnecessary risk.
Contrary to popular belief, I do in fact, sympathize with the Simple Haskell and Production Haskell movements - I think they’re necessary for moving Haskell forward and sustaining the exponential growth curve we need to survive (this is, fwiw, why i focus on low-level and mundane utilities that benefit everyone, and save the research for my personal work). However, for every manifesto, I’ve yet to see an actionable structure that can really make an impact. This is why Haskell Foundation was built; to move the needle as best we can with a funding structure that could have the real impact we want, without (ideally) inflicting the worst of what volunteer martyrdom does to this community.
Good luck to everyone working on the project, but I can’t see it succeeding. The work just doesn’t seem to be there, and the onus is on far too many undefined variables to make it succeed in my view.