<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>I think the problem with different stability in different parts
of base is that it makes it very difficult for package maintainers
to get an accurate set of bounds. If you write<tt> base >= 4.8
&& < 5</tt><tt> </tt>you may later need to revise
the bounds, and if you write <tt>base >= 4.8 && <
4.12 </tt>you will likely have bounds be too strict (which may
not be revised for every package version...).<br>
<br>
I had the impression that splitting <tt>base</tt> would be done
using backpack, so that you could provide alternate <tt>base</tt>
implementations for e.g. GHCJS. <br>
<br>
There's a 4 year-old trac ticket <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10266">here</a>
which has some other stuff. There, it talks about user-provided <tt>base</tt>
implementations as the advantage rather than versioning. I think
this approach is likely to provide the biggest improvements
without breaking anything. <br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/30/18 12:37 PM, Sven Panne wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CANBN=mtp-VxiRFgsE51Yr7+Jjh2wBbemmpmj=u3hBTf50zK8SQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">Am Di., 30. Okt. 2018 um 16:32 Uhr schrieb
Daniel Cartwright <<a href="mailto:chessai1996@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">chessai1996@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">DOA seems kinda harsh at this point.</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think "DOA" is the right description for every proposal
touching the foundations of a language ecosystem in an
incompatible way *unless* there are very, very good reasons
to break things. And even then, you should better have a
good migration story. Python 3 anybody?</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto"> If base just re-exports the stuff, that
makes sense, but wouldn't we want to move it out
eventually?</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hmmm, what problem exactly should be solved by splitting
base? Has this been written down somewhere? Edward mentioned
different stability in different parts of base, which is
certainly true, but do we have concrete convincing examples
of problems caused by that? Does a migration story exist? I
just want to remind everybody about the trouble and effort
involved in pushing the AMP and FTP through the ecosystem,
which are probably peanuts compared to a reorganization of
base...</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Libraries@haskell.org">Libraries@haskell.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries">http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>