<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    On 11/13/16 6:05 AM, Saurabh Nanda wrote:<br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAPz=2oHCHMZSmOY6GLpD7aGxJZJzhpskJoe8ZSLNLYmb9szvgQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div class="gmail_extra">
                  <div class="gmail_quote"><span class="gmail-">
                      <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px
                        0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                        rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                        <div dir="ltr">
                          <div class="gmail_extra">
                            <div class="gmail_quote">
                              <div>* Stackage & Hackage combine --
                                even the .cabal & .stack file
                                formats (if possible)</div>
                            </div>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </blockquote>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                    </span>
                    <div>Let's not conflate two things. I assume you're
                      talking about stack.yaml as the ..stack file
                      format. This should be a completely separate
                      discussion for multiple reasons:</div>
                    <div><br>
                    </div>
                    <div>* That's about Stack vs cabal-install instead
                      of Stackage vs Hackage</div>
                    <div>* It's completely necessary to have
                      package-level vs project-level configuration (even
                      cabal-install has a separate project config format
                      separate from the .cabal format)</div>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>I didn't realise that. Let me read more about the
              problems that stack is trying to solve vs those that cabal
              is trying to solve. To my untrained eye, they're solving
              very similar problems to exist as two separate projects.
              Isn't a package a kind of a project? Or vice-versa.</div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Here's what I wrote last time this was discussed:<br>
    <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2016-September/124896.html">https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2016-September/124896.html</a><br>
    <br>
    which is pretty much what Snoyman said in his follow-up here.  To
    me, stack is trying to solve the same problems as hsenv, as well as
    the same problems as cabal-install, as well as some problems that
    neither solves.  And although there's overlap between cabal-install
    and stack, that's not the same as saying there's overlap between
    stack.yaml and .cabal files.<br>
    <br>
    --Patrick<br>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>