[Haskell-cafe] RE: Definition of the Haskell standard library

[brad clawsie]

On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 09:16:33AM -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
> If there could be built-in quality control in promoting certain 
> packages, that would be great. 

it needs to be more fine grained. a new version of a package may
indeed rollback some positive attributes (stability for example) that
a previous version demonstrated...perhaps intentionally (when an
author is choosing to break an api, etc), perhaps not (plain old bugs)

we already have "quality claims" of two kinds for hackage packages:
implicit (version number, 0.* indicating lack of maturity) and
explicit (stability: experimental, stable, etc). allowing two scores
to be maintained for "stability" - author score AND audience score,
seems like a good way of moderating claims. simply allow people with
haskell.org accounts to select a pulldown in the package listing with
options for the stability score, with obvious safety features (one
vote per account per package version, etc)