patch applied (cabal): Implement QA for PackageDescription

[Ross Paterson]

On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 04:39:11PM -0800, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> Thu Jan 17 14:36:10 PST 2008  Lennart Kolmodin <kolmodin at gentoo.org>
>   * Implement QA for PackageDescription
>   Addresses #191 (QA) and #180 (QA for missing license).
>   This patch only adds a new exposed module, it's not yet used anywhere.

I'd prefer that it be called something other than "QA", because it doesn't
(and can't) assure quality.

Would it make sense to combine this with sanityCheckPackage, possibly
with a selectable level of checking, so that all the checks are in one
place, and policy can be easily adjusted?