Looks good to me. Not sure if removing badges was necessary, but I don't particularly care about it

I really like the badges - what was the rationale for removing them?

Looks good to me. Not sure if removing badges was necessary, but I don't particularly care about it

I really like the badges - what was the rationale for removing them?

Note that the "build result" and "coverage" badges are still there: they are useful while this is a proposal too.

I only removed the version badges. My thinking was that they don't provide valuable information at this stage. Our hope is that this will be version 1.2, so we don't expect any releases before this is all merged into the main repo. As a result, the version shown will always be 1.1, and it will point to Hackage, which contain docs that are very different from what is in this repo, and the Hackage page itself points back to a different repo ("head: git clone http://git.haskell.org/packages/random.git" actually, lol).

I think that all of that is more confusing than helpful. And once this is merged, we'll have to rejig the README anyway to update links etc.

This got me thinking. This PR already points to Haddocks that have been generated specifically for this fork. Perhaps the README could just make it explicit that this is a fork? Then we could e.g. point to the v1.1 Haddocks hosted on Hackage to make it easier for people to see the difference between the released version and this fork ...

Going even further, if we make this README explicitly the landing page for this fork and our work, we may as well include https://github.com/idontgetoutmuch/random/blob/v1.2-release-notes/RELEASE-NOTES-v1.2.md in there.

Sorry about that stream of consciousness. I'll propose something along those lines, then we have something concrete to discuss.

Okay, I've had a go at making the README explicitly a landing page for this repo as a proposed random v1.2. What do you think?