Should we aim for a new release in late January?
simonpj at microsoft.com
Thu Nov 28 12:12:54 UTC 2013
Is it really that many cycles? (Compared to all the other great stuff the Cabal team are doing.)
From: Johan Tibell [mailto:johan.tibell at gmail.com]
Sent: 28 November 2013 12:07
To: Simon Peyton-Jones
Cc: cabal-devel at haskell.org
Subject: Re: Should we aim for a new release in late January?
I don't think it's being actively worked on. Duncan and I chat about it once in a while when we meet in person, but we don't have the cycles to do it.
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com<mailto:simonpj at microsoft.com>> wrote:
I'm thrilled that there so much Cabal activity!
Is anyone working on, or interested in, the issue of compiling and installing the same package against different dependencies? (There was a Google SoC project about this.) Cabal sandboxes address the same issue, but at some user cost. It should Just Work.
From: cabal-devel [mailto:cabal-devel-bounces at haskell.org<mailto:cabal-devel-bounces at haskell.org>] On Behalf Of Johan Tibell
Sent: 27 November 2013 21:01
To: cabal-devel at haskell.org<mailto:cabal-devel at haskell.org>
Subject: Should we aim for a new release in late January?
Cabal development is continuing at a furious pace. There are lots of great things in master that I'd like to get out to users, such as
* relinking avoidance
* build -j
* ability to specify exact deps on the command line
* haskell-suite compiler support
* bug fixes
Here's an approximate list of commits (both Cabal and cabal-install) since the last release:
It's not entirely accurate as some patches were cherry-picked onto the 1.18 branch and thus have different commit IDs.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cabal-devel