Continuing the discussion from The Principles of PureScript:
I’ve been thinking about that idea, and I’m wondering if it’s fair to enough PS users.
Consider how we’d communicate this policy to people who want to give the PS language new feature.
“Until PS gets X amount of documentation we can’t accept your PR. So, if you want to lower the time until we merge your PR, you can add lots of documentation. Otherwise, you can maintain a fork of the PureScript compiler.”
Forcing a fork is only slightly concerning right now. More importantly, I think there are several people who really want the PureScript language to be awesome, and it feels a little unfair to put a ceiling on their contributions.
Even more unfair to those people is that documentation and spec-writing is a huge project with no clear end date. What’s more, it feels like documentation and language development can be developed concurrently.
If we want to slow language development to improve docs, I’d guess that a more effective means of accomplishing the goal of great documentation and a solid spec is to put a small documentation tax on language development. That is, before a PR is merged into the purescript/purescript repo, the author must improve docs somewhere. It’s just an idea, and I’m sure it’d be more difficult to implement than it is to describe it.