From johan.tibell at gmail.com Fri Feb 6 22:36:58 2015 From: johan.tibell at gmail.com (Johan Tibell) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2015 23:36:58 +0100 Subject: Getting ready for the 1.22.1.0 release, please verify that your fixes are in Message-ID: I've merged all the patches that I'm aware of that needs merging for this patch release*. Here's the complete list: https://github.com/haskell/cabal/compare/Cabal-v1.22.0.0...1.22 Please verify that all the fixes that you need are included. The only open issue I'm aware of is https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/2375. * Technically it's 1.22.1.0, but in spirit it's a patch release. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lists at chrisdornan.com Sun Feb 8 00:54:25 2015 From: lists at chrisdornan.com (Chris Dornan) Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2015 00:54:25 +0000 Subject: building without the global package-db Message-ID: Hi, I am trying to build a self-contained package-db that is independent of the global package-db. I am using ghc-7.8.4 and cabal-1.22.0.0. I create an empty package-db in package-db and type the following: cabal-1.22.0.0 install --package-db=clear --package-db=package-db bytestring-0.10.4.1 but I get cabal-1.22.0.0: With current ghc versions the global package db is always used and must be listed first. This ghc limitation may be lifted in future, see http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/5977 5977 was fixed 3 years ago -- should the error message be updated? I am told that cabal allows building without the global package db, but how? Cheers, Chris -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ezyang at mit.edu Sun Feb 8 22:10:43 2015 From: ezyang at mit.edu (Edward Z. Yang) Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2015 14:10:43 -0800 Subject: Cabal-1.22 keyed library filepaths In-Reply-To: <1421649947-sup-7083@sabre> References: <1421649947-sup-7083@sabre> Message-ID: <1423433427-sup-9821@sabre> Jens, could file a Cabal bug for the contents of this email? Edward Excerpts from Edward Z. Yang's message of 2015-01-18 22:47:23 -0800: > Hey Jens, > > The motivation for truncating the names and version was to keep > symbol name sizes manageable even with the addition of the hash, > while giving at least some hint when working with the symbols > directly. It doesn't seem that this rationale applies for library > names, so it's possible we could separate these (in any case, only > the hash really matters: the package name/version are included > in the hash), but we'd have to figure out where in the current codebase > makes assumptions about this. > > Edward > > Excerpts from Jens Petersen's message of 2015-01-18 17:54:34 -0800: > > Hi, > > > > I see that with Cabal-1.22, library paths are now of the form: > > > > /usr/lib64/ghc-7.10.0.20141222/direc_3m6Ew9I164U5MIkATLCdb8/ > > libHSdirec_3m6Ew9I164U5MIkATLCdb8-ghc7.10.0.20141222.so > > > > etc. > > > > Is the 5 character truncation of package names (and no version) necessary? > > It makes it pretty hard to see at a glance what package a particular > > directory or file belongs to and seems there is no easy way to work out the > > package version without referring to the package.conf file/dir. > > > > If possible I would prefer a filepath format like: > > > > /usr/lib64/ghc-7.10.0.20141222/directory-1.2.1.1_3m6Ew9I164U5MIkATLCdb8/ > > libHSdirectory-1.2.1.1_3m6Ew9I164U5MIkATLCdb8-ghc7.10.0.20141222.so > > > > Would that be feasible/make sense? > > > > Jens From johan.tibell at gmail.com Tue Feb 10 20:14:01 2015 From: johan.tibell at gmail.com (Johan Tibell) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 21:14:01 +0100 Subject: New features should have unit tests Message-ID: Lately it's become more and more clear to me that we cannot release (or work) on cabal effectively without often breaking previously working features. Cabal is a big project by now and has a large surface area, both in terms of features and in terms of systems (e.g. compilers, OSes, etc) it interacts with. On top of that, Cabal, being a glorified system for doing command line I/O, gets less support from the type system than your average Haskell program. I strongly suggest that future feature additions come with unit tests, preferable of the fast kind in Cabal/tests/UnitTests.hs but at the very least of the kind in Cabal/tests/PackageTests (and similarly for cabal-install). We also need to spend some time adding tests for existing features. A good start would be to look at the regressions we saw in 1.22 and writing test cases for those. -- Johan, release manager -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johan.tibell at gmail.com Sun Feb 22 13:01:26 2015 From: johan.tibell at gmail.com (Johan Tibell) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 14:01:26 +0100 Subject: Looking for a new release manager for cabal Message-ID: (bcc: haskell-cafe) Hi, After about 3 years of cabal releases I'm looking for someone else to take over the responsibility as cabal release manager. As a release manager I try to keep on top of pull requests, make releases, and make sure bugs get triaged and bugfixes get release. Anyone interested? -- Johan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From juhpetersen at gmail.com Tue Feb 24 14:27:44 2015 From: juhpetersen at gmail.com (Jens Petersen) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 23:27:44 +0900 Subject: Cabal-1.22 keyed library filepaths In-Reply-To: <1423433427-sup-9821@sabre> References: <1421649947-sup-7083@sabre> <1423433427-sup-9821@sabre> Message-ID: Hi Edward, On 9 February 2015 at 07:10, Edward Z. Yang wrote: > Jens, could file a Cabal bug for the contents of this email? I opened . Sorry for the delay, I was travelling and just saw your mail now. Thanks, Jens From the.dead.shall.rise at gmail.com Tue Feb 24 19:23:52 2015 From: the.dead.shall.rise at gmail.com (Mikhail Glushenkov) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 20:23:52 +0100 Subject: Looking for a new release manager for cabal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, On 22 February 2015 at 14:01, Johan Tibell wrote: > > Hi, > > After about 3 years of cabal releases I'm looking for someone else to take > over the responsibility as cabal release manager. Thank you for all your hard work managing Cabal releases during all this time. From cma at bitemyapp.com Tue Feb 24 19:31:50 2015 From: cma at bitemyapp.com (Chris Allen) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:31:50 -0600 Subject: Looking for a new release manager for cabal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54ECD1A6.1030205@bitemyapp.com> Indeed, thank you Johan! On 02/24/2015 01:23 PM, Mikhail Glushenkov wrote: > Hi, > > On 22 February 2015 at 14:01, Johan Tibell wrote: >> Hi, >> >> After about 3 years of cabal releases I'm looking for someone else to take >> over the responsibility as cabal release manager. > Thank you for all your hard work managing Cabal releases during all this time. > _______________________________________________ > cabal-devel mailing list > cabal-devel at haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel From lsp at informatik.uni-kiel.de Tue Feb 24 21:52:12 2015 From: lsp at informatik.uni-kiel.de (lennart spitzner) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 22:52:12 +0100 Subject: inactive issues Message-ID: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> hi, i noticed today's run at the closing "inactive" issues on the tracker. i would like to to ask an innocent question: what exactly is the benefit of this action? (i disclose that it seems to me that valid, if inactive, issues are being closed, which i do not like. but before complaining, i want to know the counter-arguments). Lennart From ttuegel at gmail.com Tue Feb 24 22:12:50 2015 From: ttuegel at gmail.com (Thomas Tuegel) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:12:50 -0600 Subject: inactive issues In-Reply-To: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> References: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> Message-ID: On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:52 PM, lennart spitzner wrote: > hi, > > i noticed today's run at the closing "inactive" issues on the tracker. i would like to to ask an innocent question: what exactly is the benefit of this action? > (i disclose that it seems to me that valid, if inactive, issues are being closed, which i do not like. but before complaining, i want to know the > counter-arguments). The most important reason is that we do not now, nor will we ever, have the human resources to fix all those issues. When we have done this before, we usually get a few people who chime in about an issue that still affects them. This allows us to prioritize on issues that cause actual developers actual problems. It also lets us find these issues; there are still valid issues back there, on Page 28 of our GitHub issue tracker, but I know I never venture back there. If an issue was closed that still causes you problems, you should by all means request that it be reopened. -- Thomas Tuegel From johan.tibell at gmail.com Wed Feb 25 07:09:30 2015 From: johan.tibell at gmail.com (Johan Tibell) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 08:09:30 +0100 Subject: inactive issues In-Reply-To: References: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> Message-ID: Good question. These issues were closed on my request. I've done similar clean-ups in the past. The issue tracker has gotten to large to be effective in help guide our work. We need to clean it up. In addition, lots of these issues weren't linked to the original reporter, making it less likely that the original reporter would step up with more information if needed, etc. On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Thomas Tuegel wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:52 PM, lennart spitzner > wrote: > > hi, > > > > i noticed today's run at the closing "inactive" issues on the tracker. i > would like to to ask an innocent question: what exactly is the benefit of > this action? > > (i disclose that it seems to me that valid, if inactive, issues are > being closed, which i do not like. but before complaining, i want to know > the > > counter-arguments). > > The most important reason is that we do not now, nor will we ever, > have the human resources to fix all those issues. When we have done > this before, we usually get a few people who chime in about an issue > that still affects them. This allows us to prioritize on issues that > cause actual developers actual problems. It also lets us find these > issues; there are still valid issues back there, on Page 28 of our > GitHub issue tracker, but I know I never venture back there. > > If an issue was closed that still causes you problems, you should by > all means request that it be reopened. > > -- > Thomas Tuegel > _______________________________________________ > cabal-devel mailing list > cabal-devel at haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lsp at informatik.uni-kiel.de Wed Feb 25 18:21:02 2015 From: lsp at informatik.uni-kiel.de (lennart spitzner) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:21:02 +0100 Subject: inactive issues In-Reply-To: References: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> Message-ID: <54EE128E.3040608@informatik.uni-kiel.de> I am not convinced. how does closing ~40 out of ~700 open tickets make the contributors more effective? that demand exceeds resources is true, but it is no argument for closing issues. many of the issues represent sensible ideas for features that do not need new feedback. I'd say the general lack of stability and the recently mentioned lack of tests are the main problems of Cabal; to a degree this looks like shooting at symptoms. But there is no need to convince me; there is need to priotize and my doubts are low priority at best. feel free to reply, but i'll try to shut up now :) Lennart On 25/02/15 08:09, Johan Tibell wrote: > Good question. > > These issues were closed on my request. I've done similar clean-ups in the > past. > > The issue tracker has gotten to large to be effective in help guide our > work. We need to clean it up. In addition, lots of these issues weren't > linked to the original reporter, making it less likely that the original > reporter would step up with more information if needed, etc. > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Thomas Tuegel wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:52 PM, lennart spitzner >> wrote: >>> hi, >>> >>> i noticed today's run at the closing "inactive" issues on the tracker. i >> would like to to ask an innocent question: what exactly is the benefit of >> this action? >>> (i disclose that it seems to me that valid, if inactive, issues are >> being closed, which i do not like. but before complaining, i want to know >> the >>> counter-arguments). >> >> The most important reason is that we do not now, nor will we ever, >> have the human resources to fix all those issues. When we have done >> this before, we usually get a few people who chime in about an issue >> that still affects them. This allows us to prioritize on issues that >> cause actual developers actual problems. It also lets us find these >> issues; there are still valid issues back there, on Page 28 of our >> GitHub issue tracker, but I know I never venture back there. >> >> If an issue was closed that still causes you problems, you should by >> all means request that it be reopened. >> >> -- >> Thomas Tuegel >> _______________________________________________ >> cabal-devel mailing list >> cabal-devel at haskell.org >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel >> > From spam at scientician.net Wed Feb 25 18:36:11 2015 From: spam at scientician.net (Bardur Arantsson) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:36:11 +0100 Subject: inactive issues In-Reply-To: <54EE128E.3040608@informatik.uni-kiel.de> References: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> <54EE128E.3040608@informatik.uni-kiel.de> Message-ID: On 25-02-2015 19:21, lennart spitzner wrote: > I am not convinced. how does closing ~40 out of ~700 open tickets make > the contributors more effective? that demand exceeds resources is > true, but it is no argument for closing issues. many of the issues > represent sensible ideas for features that do not need new feedback. > Well, it's a *start* at reducing the ridiculous number of outdated issues. Nobody is served by having huge numbers of outdated issues in an issue tracker. It's demotivating and the likelihood of an issue being fixed (or implemented, or...) decreases exponentially the longer it's been in a tracker... which is usually fair enough since it must mean that it's not *that* important after all. > I'd say the general lack of stability and the recently mentioned > lack of tests are the main problems of Cabal; > to a degree this looks like shooting at symptoms. That may certainly be the case. You should feel to contribute fixes for any of the existing issues -- that would help the Cabal maintainer(s) enormously, I suspect. Regards, From spam at scientician.net Wed Feb 25 19:04:40 2015 From: spam at scientician.net (Bardur Arantsson) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:04:40 +0100 Subject: inactive issues In-Reply-To: References: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> <54EE128E.3040608@informatik.uni-kiel.de> Message-ID: On 25-02-2015 19:36, Bardur Arantsson wrote: > On 25-02-2015 19:21, lennart spitzner wrote: >> I'd say the general lack of stability and the recently mentioned >> lack of tests are the main problems of Cabal; >> to a degree this looks like shooting at symptoms. > > That may certainly be the case. You should feel to contribute fixes for ^-- feel *free* From ttuegel at gmail.com Wed Feb 25 19:53:50 2015 From: ttuegel at gmail.com (Thomas Tuegel) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:53:50 -0600 Subject: inactive issues In-Reply-To: <54EE128E.3040608@informatik.uni-kiel.de> References: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> <54EE128E.3040608@informatik.uni-kiel.de> Message-ID: On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:21 PM, lennart spitzner wrote: > I am not convinced. how does closing ~40 out of ~700 open tickets make > the contributors more effective? that demand exceeds resources is > true, but it is no argument for closing issues. many of the issues > represent sensible ideas for features that do not need new feedback. That's 5.7% of our total open bugs. Not bad for an afternoon's work! Let me play devil's advocate here: Why should we keep *any* of the old bugs open? If the bug/feature wasn't important enough to get fixed/implemented since the GitHub migration (more than 2 years ago!), what is ever going to change? -- Thomas Tuegel From ttuegel at gmail.com Wed Feb 25 19:58:18 2015 From: ttuegel at gmail.com (Thomas Tuegel) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:58:18 -0600 Subject: inactive issues In-Reply-To: References: <54ECF28C.9070804@informatik.uni-kiel.de> <54EE128E.3040608@informatik.uni-kiel.de> Message-ID: On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Bardur Arantsson wrote: > On 25-02-2015 19:21, lennart spitzner wrote: >> I am not convinced. how does closing ~40 out of ~700 open tickets make >> the contributors more effective? that demand exceeds resources is >> true, but it is no argument for closing issues. many of the issues >> represent sensible ideas for features that do not need new feedback. >> > > Well, it's a *start* at reducing the ridiculous number of outdated > issues. Nobody is served by having huge numbers of outdated issues in an > issue tracker. It's demotivating and the likelihood of an issue being > fixed (or implemented, or...) decreases exponentially the longer it's > been in a tracker... which is usually fair enough since it must mean > that it's not *that* important after all. > >> I'd say the general lack of stability and the recently mentioned >> lack of tests are the main problems of Cabal; >> to a degree this looks like shooting at symptoms. > > That may certainly be the case. You should feel to contribute fixes for > any of the existing issues -- that would help the Cabal maintainer(s) > enormously, I suspect. On a related note, I'm tagging issues with 'documentation' or 'easy' as I find them. Either should be do-able for a first-time contributor. In particular, the 'easy' issues are ones I think I could talk a Haskell programmer through in a 1-2 paragraphs; something I think a first-time contributor could knock out in an afternoon. Periodically, folks ask about small projects for advanced students. I know Cabal's not hip and exciting, or whatever, but please think of us. -- Thomas Tuegel From carter.schonwald at gmail.com Thu Feb 26 18:02:32 2015 From: carter.schonwald at gmail.com (Carter Schonwald) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 13:02:32 -0500 Subject: Looking for a new release manager for cabal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm the wrong person to be release manager, but i'm happy to assist/help whomever steps forward to take over this (important) responsiblity On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Johan Tibell wrote: > (bcc: haskell-cafe) > > Hi, > > After about 3 years of cabal releases I'm looking for someone else to take > over the responsibility as cabal release manager. As a release manager I > try to keep on top of pull requests, make releases, and make sure bugs get > triaged and bugfixes get release. > > Anyone interested? > > -- Johan > > > _______________________________________________ > cabal-devel mailing list > cabal-devel at haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ttuegel at gmail.com Fri Feb 27 01:10:27 2015 From: ttuegel at gmail.com (Thomas Tuegel) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:10:27 -0600 Subject: Looking for a new release manager for cabal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Johan, On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Johan Tibell wrote: > After about 3 years of cabal releases I'm looking for someone else to take > over the responsibility as cabal release manager. Thank you for all your hard work as release manager! And also for all your work mentoring new developers! :) -- Thomas Tuegel From ttuegel at gmail.com Fri Feb 27 01:12:27 2015 From: ttuegel at gmail.com (Thomas Tuegel) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:12:27 -0600 Subject: Status of Cabal-2.0 plans? Message-ID: Hi cabal-devel, Is anyone actively working toward the Cabal-2.0 plan [1]? I'm referring primarily to the plan to split up the Cabal library. (I think the multi-package ideas are good, but orthogonal.) Thanks, -- Thomas Tuegel [1]. https://github.com/haskell/cabal/wiki/Cabal-2 From justin at stackbuilders.com Sat Feb 28 16:25:25 2015 From: justin at stackbuilders.com (Justin Leitgeb) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 17:25:25 +0100 Subject: Issues to close Message-ID: Hi, I've gone through a dozen or so cabal issues that are old, and which seem to have been resolved or are not serious enough to keep open. I've commented on all of those tickets with reasons I think they should be closed. If someone with permissions to close tickets on GitHub would go through this list I'd appreciate it. https://gist.github.com/jsl/93623588e788c4ad34d6 Also, I found it helpful to filter by open issues that haven't been updated since May 2012 . There are still another 36 stale issues currently in this category if anyone wants to take a look. :) Thanks! Justin -- Justin Leitgeb Twitter: @justinleitgeb Github: @jsl Co-Founder and CTO, Stack Builders Inc. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ttuegel at gmail.com Sat Feb 28 17:32:51 2015 From: ttuegel at gmail.com (Thomas Tuegel) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 11:32:51 -0600 Subject: Issues to close In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Justin Leitgeb wrote: > Hi, > > I've gone through a dozen or so cabal issues that are old, and which seem to > have been resolved or are not serious enough to keep open. I've commented on > all of those tickets with reasons I think they should be closed. If someone > with permissions to close tickets on GitHub would go through this list I'd > appreciate it. > > https://gist.github.com/jsl/93623588e788c4ad34d6 > > Also, I found it helpful to filter by open issues that haven't been updated > since May 2012. There are still another 36 stale issues currently in this > category if anyone wants to take a look. :) I just went through and closed them. Thank you for taking the time to check on some of those old tickets which were already fixed! -- Thomas Tuegel