Haddock version during build

[David Waern]

2008/6/16 Ian Lynagh <igloo at earth.li>:
> Of course, you could argue that it should be separately upgradable, but
> even then the .haddock format is fixed, and you can't rehaddock the
> bootlibs with the upgraded haddock anyway (unless you bundle the
> sources, in which case you wouldn't need haddock during the build).

In theory, one could try to make Haddock compatible with older
.haddock files, the way the Haddock 0.x series work. Then one wouldn't
have to rehaddock the boot libraries after a Haddock upgrade. When
using the same GHC version, the burden of compatibility can be handled
in Haddock, but as soon as Haddock needs a newer GHC, it is hard to
guarantee compatibility since the GHC API types that are stored in the
.haddock files might have changed.

So, if we some day settle on a stable GHC API, it might become
worthwile to maintain backwards-compatibility for .haddock files
again, and this particular (sub-) problem would go away.

David