Haddock version during build

[David Waern]

2008/6/5 Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak at cse.unsw.edu.au>:
> I agree with Ian.  Anything but bundling Haddock with GHC is going to lead
> to a big mess.  Here some reasons:
>
> * If you have multiple versions of GHC installed, you likely need multiple
> versions of Haddock.  Keeping those in sync separately is a pain.
>
> * Providing Haddock with a library path at install time is infeasible for
> Linux packages managers and similar.
>
> * Automatically searching for a matching GHC is fragile and OS dependent.
>  It also often won't work; eg, when building a binary-dist for a compiler
> that you haven't installed on your system - I do that very often.
>
> I think Haddock needs be bundled and installed with GHC - just like ghc-pkg.
>  So, darcs-all should have an option to pull the Haddock repo into the build
> tree.  Then,  it is built there after stage2 as described by Simon.  There
> needs to be an inplace version and an install version, and the install
> targets should handle it just like ghc-pkg.
>
> Manuel

How will upgrades of Haddock be handled?

David