On the state of the Haskell Foundation

[Julian Ospald]

Friends,

I want to raise a couple of observations regarding the Haskell Foundation that I think need attention.

As you might know I've been somewhat involved in the "unified installer" proposal. I don't want to get into the details of those events as I think they can be resolved manually and this isn't about technicalities or specific people.

Instead I want to raise your attention towards how the Haskell Foundation might be perceived from the outside and want to discuss whether this aligns with its self-image and how to resolve possible confusion and tension.


My involvement with HF has been rather mixed so far. In the beginning I felt cut out from discussions that I would have expected to be involved in, simply because I spent a couple of years working on solutions. In order to be included, I had to:

* figure out who to talk to... this wasn't that easy
* join the HF slack and write a couple of people lengthy texts
* have long video calls with several parties

By this time I already felt exhausted, needed to request inclusion in the next tech track, tried to keep track of conversations etc.

During the rest of my involvement, this is the picture that I perceived and I have to be frank here:

1. There seem to be major issues with communication between HF and community stake holders (going far beyond the proposal in question, there have been many more such instances)
2.There seem to be occasional internal communication issues as well, causing confusion and misalignment. I'm unable to comment on the nature of these issues, since I'm not an insider.
3.I've experienced technical bias. Although we all have it, I was rather confused how deeply HF is involved in tech discussions/decisions. I think the homepage doesn't really make clear how HF engages in technical change. It appears to be much more than simply bringing the community together.
4.From private discussions I'm aware of a couple of high stakes community members, who have turned their back on HF. This is concerning. There seems to exist some friction already.

As such, I'm asking you:

1. What are your goals? And how do you plan to achieve them?
2.Do you plan to engage the community better? What processes do you have to ensure inclusion and neutral representation? How do you plan to connect different parties and mediate?

My current view is that there seem to be a few highly engaged individuals, that drive forward useful change. But at the same time the modus operandi is nebulous to me.

This is just my opinion and I may be wrong, but I believe HF shouldn't be on the drivers seat in technical matters. The haskell community owns whatever they do. HF should be a hub where community members connect and know they are heard. A place where community wide discussions are carefully moderated, support for any type of useful projects can be orchestrated and where industry users and maintainers alike go to get an accurate and neutral picture of the state of the community, ecosystem and progress (I'm thinking something bigger than the Haskell Survey).

So I see the role of HF primarily not as a "proposal initiator", although that surely can be a useful addition. Instead it should focus on actually connecting people and I'm afraid I haven't seen much of that.

I believe HF is an opportunity, but one that isn't guaranteed to succeed. And I'm just providing my observations here that left me wildly confused. Feel free to correct me (and I hope you do).

Cheers,
Julian

[Tom Ellis]

Dear Julian,

Thank you very much for taking the time to share with us your
observations. We're very grateful for this feedback. We are also
very grateful for your long-running contributions to the community,
particularly ghcup which is a critical part of the ecosystem.

I wish to offer you my apologies for the experiences you have had
interacting with the Haskell Foundation. We would very much like to
change things so that future interactions with you and other members
of our valued community go much more smoothly. After all, some of the
key components of our ethos are commitment to empowering the
community, openness, friendliness, and diversity, and transparency.
We want to live out this ethos but clearly we are not completely there
yet! We will strive harder to be.

To that end I would welcome hearing more about your experiences and
your thoughts on what we could do differently in the future. A video
call would probably be the highest-bandwidth medium of interaction,
but I'm mindful that you mentioned you felt exhausted by previous
video calls with several parties, so if you prefer private email to me
or public email to this list that is fine too. What's important to me
is that you get the opportunity to share your thoughts in more detail
so we can use your feedback to improve.

With regard to your specific questions:

1. Our stated goal is "broadening the adoption of Haskell, by
supporting its ecosystem of tools, libraries, education, and
research". Our exact plans to achieve this goal are very much open
for debate. We're a young organisation still finding our feet and
feedback and participation from community members like you is very
important to how we form our plans. Therefore we would love to hear
more!

2. Similarly, we are very keen to engage the community better but how
we do so is also up for discussion and we welcome your thoughts.

Looking forward to hearing from you, and thanks again.

Tom