vectorisation code?

[Geoffrey Mainland]

On 01/22/2015 10:50 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
> On 2015-01-22 at 14:59:51 +0100, Geoffrey Mainland wrote:
>> The current situation is that DPH is not being built or maintained at
>> all. Given this state of affairs, it is hard to justify keeping it
>> around---DPH is just bitrotting.
>>
>> I am proposing that we reconnect it to the build and keep it building,
>> putting it in minimal maintenance mode. 
> Ok, but how do we avoid issues like
>
>  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.haskell.ghc.devel/5645/
>
> in the future then? DPH became painful back then, because we didn't know
> what to do with 'vector' (which as a package at the time also suffered
> from neglect of maintainership)
>
>
> Cheers,
>   hvr
>

That's part of "minimal maintenance mode." Yes, keeping DPH will impose
some burden. I am not pretending that keeping DPH imposes no cost, but
instead asking what cost we are willing to pay to keep DPH
working---maybe the answer is "none."

As for the particular issue you mentioned, I patched DPH to fix
compatibility with the new vector. Those changes have been in the tree
for some time, but DPH was never reconnected to the build, so it has
bitrotted again.

Note that vector *also* no longer builds with the other libraries in the
tree, so if we excise DPH, we should excise vector.

I am willing to put some effort into fixing these sorts of problems when
they come up. That may still impose too much burden on the other developers.

Geoff