From magnus at therning.org  Sun Jan  8 23:26:48 2017
From: magnus at therning.org (Magnus Therning)
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 00:26:48 +0100
Subject: [arch-haskell] Does ArchHaskell still have purpose?
Message-ID: <871swdxhdz.fsf@therning.org>


Hi all,

Well, the subject line says it all really. Does ArchHaskell still have
a role in the Arch world?

These are the reasons for asking this at this point:

- the Haskell packages in [community] now number more than 400 and there
  is considerable overlap with ArchHaskell (unfortunately it's not a
  superset, not yet anyway)
- the Haskell packages in [community] also seem to be well maintained
  and to receive timely updates,
- the build-tool and development-tool situation for Haskell has improved
  considerably over the last few years, between `stack` and `cabal`
  coupled with improvements to `ghci` and introduction of `ghc-mod`,
  `intero` and `hsdev` I feel that Haskell development now should be
  carried out without system-wide installation of libs.

In particular the last point means that I personally haven't had `ghc`
installed via a package for the last couple of months.

/M

--
Magnus Therning              OpenPGP: 0x927912051716CE39
email: magnus at therning.org   jabber: magnus at therning.org
twitter: magthe               http://therning.org/magnus

Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the
ark; professionals built the Titanic.
     — Anonymous
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/arch-haskell/attachments/20170109/d8da0183/attachment.sig>

From holmisen at gmail.com  Mon Jan  9 06:40:01 2017
From: holmisen at gmail.com (Johan Holmquist)
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 07:40:01 +0100
Subject: [arch-haskell] Does ArchHaskell still have purpose?
In-Reply-To: <CAB_cSPfO6muPpJH+-+ur67c=X9v_Q3fS2xyJ+kepXvqytknOOg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <871swdxhdz.fsf@therning.org>
 <CAB_cSPdtH-e2dUDMRppyyKyhZiY9K471QHvZJnxv0AkrLbzyoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB_cSPdfjyF3znh8Emqj+K-oiVk+jtmZzbh8mCHr=cGuvS+_fQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB_cSPfO6muPpJH+-+ur67c=X9v_Q3fS2xyJ+kepXvqytknOOg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAB_cSPcLC0957TBWOopbSAFgXpt1jrZRTaWBnm0LLuMHVWaQFw@mail.gmail.com>

I'd say that binary packages are really valuable for installing a global
haskell dev environment for quick hacks and scripts for which it would not
be practical to setup a project and download and build a lot of deps. At
least ghc and base should be installed globally so one can just fire up the
REPL to try things interactively.

I have noticed that community has gotten real good support for Haskell
(again), and I have switched to using that because I prefer community
controlled packages. For me this has worked out without any problem (I used
arch haskell before), so there may not be the need for arch haskell at this
point...

I am very greatful for all the work you've made on the arch haskell repo.
It served me well for a long time when the official haskell support failed.

Regards
Johan

On 9 Jan 2017 12:27 a.m., "Magnus Therning" <magnus at therning.org> wrote:


Hi all,

Well, the subject line says it all really. Does ArchHaskell still have
a role in the Arch world?

These are the reasons for asking this at this point:

- the Haskell packages in [community] now number more than 400 and there
  is considerable overlap with ArchHaskell (unfortunately it's not a
  superset, not yet anyway)
- the Haskell packages in [community] also seem to be well maintained
  and to receive timely updates,
- the build-tool and development-tool situation for Haskell has improved
  considerably over the last few years, between `stack` and `cabal`
  coupled with improvements to `ghci` and introduction of `ghc-mod`,
  `intero` and `hsdev` I feel that Haskell development now should be
  carried out without system-wide installation of libs.

In particular the last point means that I personally haven't had `ghc`
installed via a package for the last couple of months.

/M

--
Magnus Therning              OpenPGP: 0x927912051716CE39
email: magnus at therning.org   jabber: magnus at therning.org
twitter: magthe               http://therning.org/magnus

Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the
ark; professionals built the Titanic.
     — Anonymous

_______________________________________________
arch-haskell mailing list
arch-haskell at haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/arch-haskell/attachments/20170109/f7a501cf/attachment.html>

From magnus at therning.org  Mon Jan  9 13:32:51 2017
From: magnus at therning.org (Magnus Therning)
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 14:32:51 +0100
Subject: [arch-haskell] Does ArchHaskell still have purpose?
In-Reply-To: <CAB_cSPcLC0957TBWOopbSAFgXpt1jrZRTaWBnm0LLuMHVWaQFw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <871swdxhdz.fsf@therning.org>
 <CAB_cSPdtH-e2dUDMRppyyKyhZiY9K471QHvZJnxv0AkrLbzyoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB_cSPdfjyF3znh8Emqj+K-oiVk+jtmZzbh8mCHr=cGuvS+_fQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB_cSPfO6muPpJH+-+ur67c=X9v_Q3fS2xyJ+kepXvqytknOOg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB_cSPcLC0957TBWOopbSAFgXpt1jrZRTaWBnm0LLuMHVWaQFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87vato8ikc.fsf@therning.org>


Johan Holmquist <holmisen at gmail.com> writes:

> I'd say that binary packages are really valuable for installing a
> global haskell dev environment for quick hacks and scripts for which
> it would not be practical to setup a project and download and build a
> lot of deps. At least ghc and base should be installed globally so one
> can just fire up the REPL to try things interactively.

I've been using `stack ghci` for that, and for more involved stuff I've
used `stack exec zsh -- --login` to get a shell with access to ghc :)

For scripts it's possible to create a she-bang line with `stack` that
will pull down the required ghc and dependencies. So, a *realy* long
startup the first time, but subsequent invocations are quick :)

I'm mostly mentioning this to point out that options exist, and that
maybe, just maybe, binary packages for anything but tools (stack, hlint,
pandoc, ...) aren't really that useful at all any longer.

/M

--
Magnus Therning              OpenPGP: 0x927912051716CE39
email: magnus at therning.org   jabber: magnus at therning.org
twitter: magthe               http://therning.org/magnus

Unix is the answer, but only if you phrase the question very
carefully.
     — Unknown
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/arch-haskell/attachments/20170109/f1198623/attachment.sig>